Ticket #1332930 (Feature Requests)
jason at dixongroup.net
Fri Aug 11 19:36:02 CEST 2006
On Aug 11, 2006, at 1:27 PM, Mark Edwards wrote:
> 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.
I think that LDAP *is* a standard for "networking address books".
But that doesn't mean that your webmail interface is the right place
to administer it. ;-)
More information about the Dev