Re: Further problems with ldap_connect

On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 09:27:36AM -0400, Stewart Dean wrote: > Gentlebeings: > > I talked with the IBM SecureWay Directory support folks on this problem (Please see my > "Problems > with ldap_connect" post, which <ahem> no one has responded to yet), and in the > initial poking around > discovered that it doesn't seem that IBM doesn't supports ldap_connect calls, but > rather ldap_open > and ldap_init. Before everyone starts crowing about IBM departures from Open Standards, take a > look > at the original LDAP RFC1823, which specifies ldap_open...and nothing else. I have been unable > to > find any subsequent RFC specifying anything for either ldap_init or ldap_connect. > > Would someone of an architectural frame of mind explain WTF is going on. Is Open Standards > (which I > had assumed IETF RFC based) not standardized? Most modern API's follow some version of draft-ietf-ldapext-ldap-c-api-0x.txt This is necessary to provide for LDAPv3. It's not an RFC but it's the closest thing to a standard we got. Your problem with a blank page when using ldap_connect() is most likely due to a segfault (crash) in PHP. This typically happens when there are multiple libraries with LDAP functions linked into PHP. Oracle is one typical culprit. Stig