openldap-bugs November 2024

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
26 discussions

[Issue 10286] New: ldap_pvt_gettime may result in "not new enough csn" problems in multi-thread case.
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 20 Nov '24

20 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10286 Issue ID: 10286 Summary: ldap_pvt_gettime may result in "not new enough csn" problems in multi-thread case. Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.6 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: 971748261(a)qq.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1041 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1041&action=edit the log of adding two entry which shows the time sequence. I used openldap as krb5's database, and openldap was deploymented in mirrormode. I tried to add kerberos principals via kadmin.local -q "addprinc -randkey principal. slapd log showed that the entry of kadmin/admin was added earlier than the entry of ossuser. But the csn of kadmin/admin was greater than ossuser. In this case, when the two entry began to sync to the other slapd server, ossuser was ignored because of "csn not new enough" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

[Issue 10274] New: Replication issue on MMR configuration
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 20 Nov '24

20 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10274 Issue ID: 10274 Summary: Replication issue on MMR configuration Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.14 Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: falgon.comp(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1036 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1036&action=edit In this attachment you will find 2 openldap configurations for 2 instances + slamd conf exemple + 5 screenshots to show the issue and one text file to explain what you see Hello we are openning this issue further to the initial post in technical : https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-technical@openldap.org/… Issue : We are working on a project and we've come across an issue with the replication after performance testing : *Configuration :* RHEL 8.6 OpenLDAP 2.5.14 *MMR-delta *configuration on multiple servers attached 300,000 users configured and used for tests *olcLastBind: TRUE* Use of SLAMD (performance shooting) *Problem description:* We are currently running performance and resilience tests on our infrastructure using the SLAMD tool configured to perform BINDs and MODs on a defined range of accounts. We use a load balancer (VIP) to poll all of our servers equally. (but it is possible to do performance tests directly on each of the directories) With our current infrastructure we're able to perform approximately 300 MOD/BIND/s. Beyond that, we start to generate delays and can randomly come across one issue. However, when we run performance tests that exceed our write capacity, our replication between servers can randomly create an incident with directories being unable to catch up with their replication delay. The directories update their contextCSNs, but extremely slowly (like freezing). From then on, it's impossible for the directories to catch again. (even with no incoming traffic) A restart of the instance is required to perform a full refresh and solve the incident. We have enabled synchronization logs and have no error or refresh logs to indicate a problem ( we can provide you with logs if necessary). We suspect a write collision or a replication conflict but this is never write in our sync logs. We've run a lot of tests. For example, when we run a performance test on a single live server, we don't reproduce the problem. Anothers examples: if we define different accounts ranges for each server with SALMD, we don't reproduce the problem either. If we use only one account for the range, we don't reproduce the problem either. ______________________________________________________________________ I have add some screenshots on attachement to show you the issue and all the explanations. ______________________________________________________________________ *Symptoms :* One or more directories can no longer be replicated normally after performance testing ends. No apparent error logs. Need a restart of instances to solve the problem. *How to reproduce the problem:* Have at least two servers in MMR mode Set LastBind to TRUE Perform a SLAMD shot from a LoadBalancer in bandwidth mode OR start multiple SLAMD test on same time for each server with the same account range. Exceed the maximum write capacity of the servers. *SLAMD configuration :* authrate.sh --hostname ${HOSTNAME} --port ${PORTSSL} \ --useSSL --trustStorePath ${CACERTJKS} \ --trustStorePassword ${CACERTJKSPW} --bindDN "${BINDDN}" \ --bindPassword ${BINDPW} --baseDN "${BASEDN}" \ --filter "(uid=[${RANGE}])" --credentials ${USERPW} \ --warmUpIntervals ${WARMUP} \ --numThreads ${NTHREADS} ${ARGS} -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 8

[Issue 10275] New: mdb_load could use a parameter to pass batch size
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 20 Nov '24

20 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10275 Issue ID: 10275 Summary: mdb_load could use a parameter to pass batch size Product: LMDB Version: 0.9.21 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: tools Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: gkwicker(a)amazon.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1037 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1037&action=edit Patch to mdb_load.c in version 0.9.21 mdb_load is very slow when ingesting a large db. The attached patch (0.9.21 but will apply to other versions with modification) allows the user to pass a batch size to be used instead of the default value of 100. Changing the batch size to a larger value improves ingestion speed. I, Gary Wicker, hereby place the following modifications to OpenLDAP Software (and only these modifications) into the public domain. Hence, these modifications may be freely used and/or redistributed for any purpose with or without attribution and/or other notice. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 13

[Issue 10282] New: MSVC builds are not supported
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Nov '24

19 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10282 Issue ID: 10282 Summary: MSVC builds are not supported Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.18 Hardware: All OS: Windows Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: cmb(a)php.net Target Milestone: --- I'm a maintainer of an OpenLDAP port[1] which is used to build liblber and libldap for PHP on Windows. So far this uses hand-made configuration and Visual Studio solutions, but that is not sustainable in the long run. Instead, I'd rather like to use the autotools based build chain with MSYS2 (or Cygwin), but still using the MSVC build tools (cl.exe, link.exe, etc.) and the MS Windows SDK for best compatibility with other builds for PHP on Windows. Apparently, this is not yet supported by OpenLDAP (2.5.18). I've managed to add some patches[2] to get where I'd like this to go[3]. Some of the patches are highly PHP (BC) specific, some are just quick hacks (because I don't know better), but some appear to be appropriate for inclusion into the OpenLDAP sources. Are you generally interested in supporting MSVC tools and MS Windows SDKs? If so, what would be the best way to contribute -- sending MRs to the repo[4]? Should these tackle individual issues, or rather be complete (note that I'm likely not able to provide a full-fledged solution due to my very limited knowledge of autotools and Linux, and limited time). [1] <https://github.com/winlibs/openldap> [2] <https://github.com/winlibs/openldap/tree/cmb/2.5.18> [3] <https://github.com/cmb69/winlib-builder/actions/runs/11713086509> [4] <https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap> -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 1

[Issue 10285] New: Account on gitlab -- gitlab account awaiting approval
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Nov '24

19 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10285 Issue ID: 10285 Summary: Account on gitlab -- gitlab account awaiting approval Product: LMDB Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ahmed.zaki(a)imperial.ac.uk Target Milestone: --- Dear, I have some test cases I would like to contribute to LMDB. I created an account using the email address: ahmed.zaki(a)imperial.ac.uk Would it be possible to approve the account ? Kind regards, Ahmed -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

[Issue 10020] New: dynlist's @groupOfUniqueNames is considered only for the first configuration line
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Nov '24

13 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10020 Issue ID: 10020 Summary: dynlist's @groupOfUniqueNames is considered only for the first configuration line Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.13 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: msl(a)touk.pl Target Milestone: --- If we consider the following configuration of dynlist: {0}toukPerson labeledURI uniqueMember+memberOf@groupOfUniqueNames {1}groupOfURLs memberURL uniqueMember+dgMemberOf@groupOfUniqueNames The {0} entry will correctly populate the memberOf relatively to static group membership. The {1} entry will produce dgMemberOf with dynamic group membership correctly (based on memberURL query) but it will not populate static entries IF {0} entry in configuration is present. IF I remove {0} from the dynlist configuration - or - remove @groupOfUniqueNames part from this configuration line, then both dynamic and static entries will be populated correctly for {1}. So the effects are as follows on some user entry: if both {0} and {1} are present - {1} produced only dynamic groups: memberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl memberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=dyntouk,ou=dyntest,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl if both {0} and {1} are present and @groupOfUniqueNames is removed from {0} - {1} produced static+dynamic groups: dgMemberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=dyntouk,ou=dyntest,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl If only {1} is present - {1} produced static+dynamic groups: dgMemberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=dyntouk,ou=dyntest,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl For completness - if only {0} is present: memberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl memberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl I would expect this behavior to be correct for the first case - {0} and {1}. memberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl memberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=dyntouk,ou=dyntest,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 8

[Issue 9934] New: slapd-config(5) should document how to store certificates for slapd usage
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Nov '24

13 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9934 Issue ID: 9934 Summary: slapd-config(5) should document how to store certificates for slapd usage Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.13 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: documentation Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Commit 7b41feed83b expanded the ability of cn=config to save the certificates used for TLS by slapd directly in the config database. However the documentation for the new parameters was never added to the slapd-config(5) man page. olcTLSCACertificate $ olcTLSCertificate $ olcTLSCertificateKey -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 8

[Issue 10226] New: [PATCH] ldap.conf: some remarks and editorial fixes for this man page
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Nov '24

13 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10226 Issue ID: 10226 Summary: [PATCH] ldap.conf: some remarks and editorial fixes for this man page Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: documentation Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: bjarniig(a)vortex.is Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1020 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1020&action=edit Remarks and editotiral fixes for the manual ldap.conf.5 Version 2.6.8 is not named on the webpage when entering an issue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10272] New: translucent regression when asking for attributes
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Nov '24

13 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10272 Issue ID: 10272 Summary: translucent regression when asking for attributes Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.8 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: mike(a)nolta.net Target Milestone: --- Hi, Attached please find a translucent overlay regression testcase. The test works in version 2.4.59, but fails in versions 2.5.5 and 2.6.8. Basically, `ldapsearch "employeeType=fulltime"` returns the expected entries, but `ldapsearch "employeeType=fulltime" cn` returns nothing. -Mike -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 10284] New: RFE: retain subordinate entries to cn=connections,cn=monitor branch for a configurable duration
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Nov '24

13 Nov '24

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10284 Issue ID: 10284 Summary: RFE: retain subordinate entries to cn=connections,cn=monitor branch for a configurable duration Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: chris.paul(a)rexconsulting.net Target Milestone: --- Please consider an enhancement to retain entries under the cn=connections,cn=monitor branch for a configurable duration. This would enable monitoring of short-lived connections that currently disappear between polling intervals, significantly increasing the utility of this metric for connection tracking. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs November 2024