Wednesday, May 07, 2008

 

Thoughts on Active Directory Application Mode

Mark Wilcox questions the usage of ADAM in some scenarios. I figured, I would provide another perspective...



I would love to know your thinking on why a database itself can't be exposed via the LDAP protocol? For example, what would prevent Microsoft from allowing SQL Server to be accessed by not only the TDS protocol but also LDAP? The code required to make this happen, wouldn't be too difficult for a talented team to get right. Of course, if you have less talented individuals then performance or other factors may emerge. Anyway, by putting it into the DB itself, wouldn't it help customers avoid purchasing yet another product with yet another support model?

Relational databases have always had the notion of a view and it was built-in the database without requiring an extra product. So, isn't this another scenario where Microsoft or other LDAP vendors should be thinking about views for LDAP?

OK, so what would be the real reason why the AD schema can't be extended? Microsoft provides all the right tools. Is it stupid thinking in large enterprises?

OK, I guess I am now officially confused. I wasn't aware that the concept of changelog was in any LDAP standard. If ADAM doesn't implement changelog, does this make ADAM non-LDAP compliant? I do know that the use of changelog isn't just limited to provisioning tools and many fugly ECM products also leverage (used in the negative sense) this functionality.

I guess I would ask Mark, to instead of questioning the usage of ADAM, help others outside of Oracle write better enterprise applications that bind natively to LDAP and don't require anything fugly like syncronization...




Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home
| | View blog reactions


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?