I reread my previous post this morning, and you can tell I wrote it at 3AM.
I sound like a nincompoop. Thanks for your patience...

>Thankfully a broadcast protocol isn't necessary, as long as the host
>running the LDAP service is known.

>It's a similar model to DNS: if the DNS server resolves hostnames to IP
>addresses, how do you know where the DNS server is? You have to specify
>the IP address of the DNS server in your network configuration. It's
>got to start somewhere... :)

Roger that, you are absolutely right. My point is that LDAP still requires
configuration on the client side (like an IP network using static IP
addresses). If a broadcast protocol (or something along that line) were
used, it would make the system totally transparent to the users and support
people. More like DHCP that DNS...

>Likewise, the IB client needs to know at least the location of an LDAP
>repository in order to access it. We also are discussing putting
>aliases in the ibconfig file, so why not use that for the LDAP server?

I started watching this thread very late in it's life, so I probably missed
lots of background. Does IB have integrated support for user tracking via
LDAP, or was that one of the ideas presented?

>LDAP specifies a protocol that runs on top of TCP/IP. It's part of the

standard.
Gotcha. In fact, it's called Light Directory Access Protocol. Built by UMich
Ann Arbor, and is a subset of the X.500 directory standard DAP (hence the L
in LDAP). A quote from the ColdFusion App Construction Kit:
"...think of LDAP as being to directory services as ODBC is to databases.
LDAP allows clients to talk to a single interface, and thereby access many
different directory services products. The big difference is that ODBC
requires the client install different DB drivers and know the type of server
being accessed. LDAP places this requirement on the servers."
If LDAP really is directory services (like Active Directory from Win2k or
NDS), then it is PERFECT for this application.

>Let me think about your other comments for establishing domains of
>databases. It's interesting, if a bit beyond the scope of what I was

proposing.
I just read a post of yours where you said that you envisioned this becoming
a centralized management tool for databases and users in an enterprise. Why
not take it all the way?

I am relatively new to the develper world, having spent most of the last 7
years in support. I have worked in scripting languages forever (started with
HyperCard in 1985), now working mostly in ColdFusion, which also happens to
have built-in LDAP support. If I say something stupid that really shows my
ignorance, just slap me. ;-) I am dying to learn as much as I can from you
guys, while providing as much as I can from my background.

Sorry this got so long. Have a good one!

Jared