<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Active Directory Application Mode (ADAM) -- Just Say Maybe</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/fsmo/archive/2004/10/06/238773.aspx</link><description>Last year Microsoft released another great tool for Plumbers to keep in their toolbox: Active Directory Application Mode (ADAM) . The "sweet spot" for ADAM is as LDAP-based storage for your custom applications -- applications that would otherwise request</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Active Directory Application Mode (ADAM) -- Just Say Maybe</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/fsmo/archive/2004/10/06/238773.aspx#238778</link><pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2004 18:43:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:238778</guid><dc:creator>Doug Lawty</dc:creator><description>I subscribe to Eric Fleischman's blog (&lt;a target="_new" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/efleis"&gt;http://blogs.msdn.com/efleis&lt;/a&gt;) and should have read it before posting this entry. It's pure coincidence that we are both writing about ADAM. Given what he just said about it (&lt;a target="_new" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/efleis"&gt;http://blogs.msdn.com/efleis&lt;/a&gt;/archive/2004/10/06/238518.aspx) and the fact that he just warned me, I expect he's going to disagree with me. :-)</description></item><item><title>re: Active Directory Application Mode (ADAM) -- Just Say Maybe</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/fsmo/archive/2004/10/06/238773.aspx#238851</link><pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2004 20:19:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:238851</guid><dc:creator>Eric Fleischman</dc:creator><description>Guilty as charged. :)&lt;br&gt;I replied a bit here: &lt;a target="_new" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/efleis/archive/2004/10/06/238850.aspx"&gt;http://blogs.msdn.com/efleis/archive/2004/10/06/238850.aspx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;At the end of the day, I agree with the spirit of your comments Doug, but I do disagree with some of the points along the way. And I think that there is a story for ADAM user auth that is worth considering.</description></item><item><title>On ADAM user authentication….</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/fsmo/archive/2004/10/06/238773.aspx#238860</link><pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2004 20:36:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:238860</guid><dc:creator>TrackBack</dc:creator><description>On ADAM user authentication….</description></item></channel></rss>