Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 14, 2024. It is now read-only.

Allow "socket" option to pass existing socket (e.g. for SOCKS5 proxying) #784

Conversation

laszloKajan
Copy link

Thank you very much for this excellent module.

Please consider my pull request: I would need this in order to be able to use ldapjs with an pre-existing SocksClient socket (that comes from 'socks') with 'ldap://' and STARTTLS.

('ldaps://' already works with a pre-existing socket which can be passed via 'tlsOptions'.)

You could mention the ability to use a proxy on the documentation website http://ldapjs.org/client.html . If need be, I can contribute my example code.

Best regards, Laszlo

@laszloKajan laszloKajan changed the title Allow "socket" option to pass for example a SOCKS5 proxy client socket Allow "socket" option to pass existing socket (e.g. for SOCKS5 proxying) Feb 7, 2022
Copy link
Member

@jsumners jsumners left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for the contribution. I think this would need to be supplied as an option at construction time and then used within the connect method. Requiring a pre-existing connection to be passed to the connect method is not an ideal API. Also, we will need unit tests before this can be accepted.

@laszloKajan
Copy link
Author

Dear James!

Thank you for the contribution. I think this would need to be supplied as an option at construction time and then used within the connect method. Requiring a pre-existing connection to be passed to the connect method is not an ideal API. Also, we will need unit tests before this can be accepted.

Thank you for writing back to me.
In my pull request, I went for an implementation with the smallest number of lines changed.
I'll implement what you suggest when I have time.

Best regards,
Laszlo

@jsumners
Copy link
Member

👋

On February 22, 2023, we released version 3 of this library. As a result, we are closing this issue/pull request.

Please see issue #839 for more information, including how to proceed if you feel this closure is in error.

@ldapjs ldapjs locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 22, 2023
@jsumners jsumners closed this Feb 22, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants