Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
getAttributeDefinition() not supported? Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • getAttributeDefinition() not supported?

    Hi,
    We are talking to Tivoli TDS 6.1

    We are coding an application in Java using JNDI. We are using Sun's standard com.sun.jndi.ldap.LdapCtxFactory, but would like to get schema information from LDAP Attributes, via calls like "Attribute.getAttributeDefinition()", however Sun's BasicAttribute implementation throws UnsupportedOperationExceptions.

    The question is, does TDS 6.1 have custom JNDI drivers that we could use instead which would properly implement these methods to give us the extended info we need? If so how can we get them? Are they in a Jar somewhere we can download?

    thanks

  • #2
    I know that IBM had its own JNDI provider and this document here shows how to read the schema information: http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/tividd...de.html#Schema

    I believe the JAR (referred in the document by the name ibmjndi.jar) should be located in your TDS installation. I no longer have TDS installed on my box to verify the exact location.

    In one of my applications, I am reading the schema information from a TDS v 6 server. But I am using plain JNDI and parsing the attribute information manually. The approach described in the above link looks lot cleaner.

    Let me know if you run into problems.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re:

      I have posted a reply yesterday but it still has not shown up. Trying for the second time:

      IBM does provide a JNDI provider that you can use to read LDAP. You can find more information here:
      http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/tividd...de.html#Schema

      The ibmjndi.jar file that is being referred in the above URL can be found in your TDS installation.

      I did read TDS schema using plain JNDI in one of my applications. It however involved manual parsing of information. Looks like the above link suggests a better approach.

      Let me know if you have any further questions.

      Comment

      Working...
      X