Ticket #1332930 (Feature Requests)
mark at antsclimbtree.com
Fri Aug 11 19:27:37 CEST 2006
On Aug 11, 2006, at 10:23 AM, Jason Dixon wrote:
> On Aug 11, 2006, at 12:18 PM, Mark Edwards wrote:
>> On an aside, why do all these clients only support read-access to
>> LDAP? Seems like it would really great to be able to use LDAP in
>> place of a local address book in all of your clients, but that's
>> not a possibility if you can't write to it.
>> I don't get why it is only considered to be useful for reading
>> from. Something in the design of it?
> Lightweight Directory Access Protocol was designed to be a
> "lightweight directory access protocol". :) That is, it is highly
> optimized for many reads, few writes. Contact information should
> not change frequently. If you want to do a lot of writes, you use
> a database.
Right, well it would be great if ANY mail client supported a standard
protocol for networking address books. It just seems absurd that
this hasn't been covered yet.
Anyway, thanks for the answer!
More information about the Dev