[Mono-devel-list] LDAP provider update

Matt Ryan mryan at novell.com
Fri Nov 7 10:24:03 EST 2003


I wanted to let everyone know what is going on with the LDAP provider
issue for Mono.  As many of you know, there was some discussion about
this a while back, about whether Novell was going to help out with this.
 I'd also like feedback on the plan to bring this about.  It is
important to me that we do it right.

Disclaimer:  I'm still learning about Mono and .NET so forgive me if I
use bad terminology!

The primary goal of our (i.e. Mono's) initial effort in this area is to
have a fully managed Directory Services provider that is OpenLDAP
compliant.  There are two initiatives currently underway to drive toward
this goal.  Here is the plan:

Initiative 1 - Create a baseline LDAP provider.  Jason Raneses is
spearheading this effort.  The resulting code will be a part of the Mono
project.  His project is hosted at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/monods/.  As you would expect, the
code will be available under the MIT license.

Initiative 2 - Create a native C# LDAP class library.  A Novell
development team is working on this right now.  The resulting code will
be a part of the OpenLDAP project and will be available under the
OpenLDAP license.  This project is hosted at
This code will be very similar to the Java OpenLDAP class library in
structure.  The reason for this is primarily for the sake of consistency
across both libraries.
You may ask why the C# LDAP library is a part of OpenLDAP and not Mono.
 Of course, Novell is interested in promoting both projects.  The
primary reason is so that C# developers anywhere can take advantage of
the class library.  My guess is that many would suspect that they could
not use it if it were part of Mono (even if this assumption were

At some point in the future, the LDAP provider from Initiative 1 could
be changed so that it uses the C# LDAP class library from Initiative 2,
resulting in a fully managed provider.  While the second uses a
different license (OpenLDAP), I don't see any reason why this cannot be
used by Mono.

Once the baseline provider is in place, it should be possible to create
additional providers for specific implementations, as was suggested
earlier.  For example, a provider for AD or (my favorite) eDirectory.

Suggestions?  Comments?  Concerns?

-Matt Ryan
Software Engineer
Linux/ZEN Developer Champion
Worldwide Developer Support

Novell, Inc., the leading provider of information solutions

More information about the Mono-devel-list mailing list