Howard Chu wrote: > Michael Ströder wrote: >> [email protected] wrote: >>> 4.2.2.2 fedfsFsn >>> IMO name/port should just be an LDAP URL. Also your definition provides >>> absolutely zero information of how the LDAP server should be contacted (e.g. >>> using ldaps or StartTLS) which both can be encoded in an LDAP URL. >> >> Which standard describes how to mandate use of StartTLS with a LDAP URL? >> OpenLDAP has its own extension key-word "StartTLS" and I'm also using it with >> web2ldap. But AFAIK this is not defined in any standard which could be >> referenced in a RFC. > > True but irrelevant. The point is that standardizing on a URL syntax today > future-proofs a spec and allows it to handle new connection mechanisms that > may appear in the future. Host/port is inextricably tied to networking in the > 1980s.
I did not want to endorse the use of host/port. I just wanted to point out that one cannot specify the use of StartTLS by LDAP URL in a standard way. Of course nothing prevents somebody to add custom extension to LDAP URLs. Ciao, Michael.
