UnboundID Java LDAP SDK
We might want to look into what can be gained by switching from using the Mozilla LDAP JDK in Dogtag to the UnboundID Java LDAP SDK. The UnboundID SDK is actively maintained, and has support for quite a few things that the Mozilla LDAP JDK is lacking. I also found this blog posting by Neil Wilson (the main developer of the UnboundID SDK), which shows performance comparisons of many Java LDAP SDKs, including Mozilla's: http://www.dirmgr.com/blog/2011/5/31/comparing-java-ldap-sdk-performance.htm... I'd recommend looking at the above blog post to see the results, but the UnboundID SDK is significantly faster than the Mozilla LDAP JDK in all tests. The UnboundID Java LDAP SDK would need to be packaged for Fedora, but that would be a pretty easy undertaking. It is available under GPLv2 and LGPLv2.1. I do not know how big an effort porting would be, but it may very well be worthwhile to switch. I've opened the following ticket in trac to look into this some more: https://fedorahosted.org/pki/ticket/102 -NGK
On 02/16/2012 01:55 PM, Nathan Kinder wrote:
We might want to look into what can be gained by switching from using the Mozilla LDAP JDK in Dogtag to the UnboundID Java LDAP SDK. The UnboundID SDK is actively maintained, and has support for quite a few things that the Mozilla LDAP JDK is lacking. I also found this blog posting by Neil Wilson (the main developer of the UnboundID SDK), which shows performance comparisons of many Java LDAP SDKs, including Mozilla's:
http://www.dirmgr.com/blog/2011/5/31/comparing-java-ldap-sdk-performance.htm...
I'd recommend looking at the above blog post to see the results, but the UnboundID SDK is significantly faster than the Mozilla LDAP JDK in all tests.
The UnboundID Java LDAP SDK would need to be packaged for Fedora, but that would be a pretty easy undertaking. It is available under GPLv2 and LGPLv2.1. I do not know how big an effort porting would be, but it may very well be worthwhile to switch. I've opened the following ticket in trac to look into this some more:
https://fedorahosted.org/pki/ticket/102
-NGK
_______________________________________________ Pki-devel mailing list Pki-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pki-devel
From the very brief look at UnboundID, its crypto implementation may not be flexible enough. Andrew
On 02/16/2012 02:25 PM, Andrew Wnuk wrote:
On 02/16/2012 01:55 PM, Nathan Kinder wrote:
We might want to look into what can be gained by switching from using the Mozilla LDAP JDK in Dogtag to the UnboundID Java LDAP SDK. The UnboundID SDK is actively maintained, and has support for quite a few things that the Mozilla LDAP JDK is lacking. I also found this blog posting by Neil Wilson (the main developer of the UnboundID SDK), which shows performance comparisons of many Java LDAP SDKs, including Mozilla's:
http://www.dirmgr.com/blog/2011/5/31/comparing-java-ldap-sdk-performance.htm...
I'd recommend looking at the above blog post to see the results, but the UnboundID SDK is significantly faster than the Mozilla LDAP JDK in all tests.
The UnboundID Java LDAP SDK would need to be packaged for Fedora, but that would be a pretty easy undertaking. It is available under GPLv2 and LGPLv2.1. I do not know how big an effort porting would be, but it may very well be worthwhile to switch. I've opened the following ticket in trac to look into this some more:
https://fedorahosted.org/pki/ticket/102
-NGK
_______________________________________________ Pki-devel mailing list Pki-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pki-devel
From the very brief look at UnboundID, its crypto implementation may not be flexible enough. It looks like the LDAPConnection class in the UnboundID SDK just needs a SocketFactory passed in for SSL/TLS support:
http://www.unboundid.com/products/ldapsdk/docs/javadoc/com/unboundid/ldap/sd... It seems to me that it would be pretty easy to write a SocketFactory that uses JSS to create the sockets (if this isn't done elsewhere already). Doing a search on this, I see that Adam did this in a test previously last year: http://adam.youglogic.com/2011/09/jss-sockets-and-httpclient Would there be value in adding a SocketFactory class to JSS itself? It could be useful to other projects. -NGK
Andrew
_______________________________________________ Pki-devel mailing list Pki-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pki-devel
participants (2)
-
Andrew Wnuk -
Nathan Kinder