- openldap-bugs - openldap.org

[Issue 9289] New: Broken link to dmoz.org
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9289 Issue ID: 9289 Summary: Broken link to dmoz.org Product: website Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: website Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: cleydyr(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- At https://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/intro.html, there's the following paragraph: --- A web directory, such as provided by the Open Directory Project <http://dmoz.org>, is a good example of a directory service. These services catalog web pages and are specifically designed to support browsing and searching. --- However, the Dmoz site is not at http://dmoz.org anymore. The user is redirected to an error page of a AWS S3 service if they try to access the link. Currently Dmoz has an archived version at https://dmoz-odp.org/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 9287] New: ldap_create cause 10s delay in some scenario
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9287 Issue ID: 9287 Summary: ldap_create cause 10s delay in some scenario Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.44 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: happy.mu(a)nokia-sbell.com Target Milestone: --- hi LDAP guys there has some issue in our product when we integrate ipv6. scenario: ipv4 internal + ipv6 external after ldap search finish, we need build ldap message by ldap_create function. some times the ldap_create message will cause 10s delay. for example: the ldap search has 4 ocs, and only the first oc's ldap_create will cause 10s delay, the fellowing ocs is within 0.0001s. we just think it may because the mutext is global and locked by other thread. could you help on this ? LOGs: there has 10s delay, and only execute ldap_create between them. 2020/07/08-16:32:11.942114-[INFO] 13 (DBL) [DBL_LlbSearchResponse:76]LLB replied successfully with [4] entries 2020/07/08-16:32:11.942181- [INFO] 13 (DBL) [DBL_LlbSearchResponse:125]Entry Buffer[0] : l_entryBerBufferPtr="0x64820136xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" 2020/07/08-16:32:21.957488 [INFO] 13 (DBL) [DBL_LlbSearchResponse:138]Successfully created LDAP dummy handle -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 16

[Issue 9285] New: Expose ppolicy control in the rootDSE
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9285 Issue ID: 9285 Summary: Expose ppolicy control in the rootDSE Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.50 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Currently the rootDSE does not expose the ppolicy control when ppolicy is instantiated. Generally the project has had a policy of not exposing controls for items that are not on a released RFC/standard. However, at this point, ppolicy is widely used, been around for years, and (eventually) the draft should get finalized. It would be useful to expose the control at this point. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Issue 9279] New: Support for Netscape password expiry controls
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9279 Issue ID: 9279 Summary: Support for Netscape password expiry controls Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- Add support for legacy clients expecting the LDAP server to attach these controls on relevant bind responses: - Password Expired Control (2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.4) - Password Expiration Warning Control (2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.5) Decisions as configured by regular password policy. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 24

[Issue 9275] New: Replace all references to master/slave with appropriate terminology
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9275 Issue ID: 9275 Summary: Replace all references to master/slave with appropriate terminology Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.51 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: blocker Priority: --- Component: documentation Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- We need to replace all references to master/slave in the documentation, code comments etc. provider, consumer multimaster -> multiprovider -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 9271] New: ldap_parse_intermediate undocumented
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9271 Issue ID: 9271 Summary: ldap_parse_intermediate undocumented Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: documentation Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- ldap_parse_intermediate is missing from manpages, should probably be included in ldap_parse_result.3. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 9263] New: test064 fails on FreeBSD
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9263 Issue ID: 9263 Summary: test064 fails on FreeBSD Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.50 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- test064 fails when executed on FreeBSD because it tries to use /bin/bash. On FrreeBSD, this is /usr/local/bin/bash -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Bug 9262] New: Segmentation Fault on ldap_chain_op during Network Issues
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9262 Bug ID: 9262 Summary: Segmentation Fault on ldap_chain_op during Network Issues Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.49 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: jeremy.diaz(a)rexconsulting.net Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 733 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=733&action=edit Full backtrace This is a follow up to the following OpenLDAP mailing list post: https://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/202001/msg00045.html The issue is as follows: Slapd crashes with a segmentation fault periodically and seems to occur most often during periods of high load. The issue seems to be related to the chain overlay. Some background info: This environment was originally made up of 3 producers and 6 consumers all on OpenLdap 2.4.48. Initially the issue did not appear to be caused directly by high load. We noticed that there was an uptick in saslauthd errors around the time when a crash occurred: Dec 11 07:23:20 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2720]: user ldap_search_st() failed: Timed out Dec 11 07:23:30 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2718]: user ldap_search_st() failed: Timed out Dec 11 07:23:40 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2718]: user ldap_search_st() failed: Timed out Dec 11 07:23:56 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2717]: user ldap_search_st() failed: Timed out Dec 11 07:23:57 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2720]: user ldap_search_st() failed: Timed out Dec 11 07:23:57 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2719]: user ldap_search_st() failed: Timed out Dec 11 07:24:05 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2718]: user ldap_search_st() failed: Timed out Dec 11 07:24:06 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2717]: user ldap_search_st() failed: Timed out Dec 11 07:24:54 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2719]: : write failure Dec 11 07:24:54 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2717]: : write failure Dec 11 07:24:54 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2719]: : write: Broken pipe Dec 11 07:24:54 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2717]: : write: Broken pipe Dec 11 07:24:54 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2718]: : write failure Dec 11 07:24:54 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2720]: : write failure Dec 11 07:24:54 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2718]: : write: Broken pipe Dec 11 07:24:54 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2720]: : write: Broken pipe Dec 11 07:25:04 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2721]: : write failure Dec 11 07:25:04 {REDACTED} saslauthd[2721]: : write: Broken pipe This seemed to indicate an issue with either AD, saslauthd or the ldap meta instance. Slapd with log level -1 did not return any obvious error messages. One consumer server was particularly problematic since it was in a data center that had a slower network connection. This server was also dealing with a subset of traffic corresponding to another one of our applications so overall there was more traffic going into this server than some the other servers. After some network improvements the segfault occurences dropped to about 1 every couple of days mostly confined to the problematic server. The environment was eventually updated to 2.4.49 but there was no obvious reduction in the number of segfaults. A while after an incident occurred that caused an increase in the latency of the network connections causing most of the slapd instances to crash constantly every few minutes. The crashing stopped only after the network latency was reduced. Ultimately what seemed to significantly reduce the number of segfaults was adding another 3 consumers to further reduce the load on each server. The following backtrace we captured seems to indicate that there is an issue with the chain overlay: #0 ldap_chain_op (op=op@entry=0x7ffbe41f0870, rs=rs@entry=0x7ffbf09bbb20, op_f=0x4a845e <ldap_back_search>, ref=ref@entry=0x0, depth=depth@entry=0) at chain.c:422 #1 0x00000000004e61da in ldap_chain_response (op=0x7ffbe41f0870, rs=0x7ffbf09bbb20) at chain.c:1090 #2 0x000000000049d323 in over_back_response (op=0x7ffbe41f0870, rs=0x7ffbf09bbb20) at backover.c:237 #3 0x0000000000447c1a in slap_response_play (op=op@entry=0x7ffbe41f0870, rs=rs@entry=0x7ffbf09bbb20) at result.c:508 #4 0x00000000004480f5 in send_ldap_response (op=op@entry=0x7ffbe41f0870, rs=rs@entry=0x7ffbf09bbb20) at result.c:583 The issue ultimately seems to stem from slapd being really sensitive to network latency. The chain overlay appears to be attempting to dereference a value that never gets set due to a timeout mechanism being exceeded because of high load and/or high network latency as chain.c:422 seems to suggest: for ( ; !BER_BVISNULL( ref ); ref++ ) { Attached is the updated full backtrace of all the threads and below is the relevant portions of our olc configuration regarding the chain overlay: dn: olcOverlay={1}chain,olcDatabase={-1}frontend,cn=config objectClass: olcOverlayConfig objectClass: olcChainConfig olcOverlay: {1}chain olcChainCacheURI: FALSE olcChainMaxReferralDepth: 1 olcChainReturnError: TRUE dn: olcDatabase={0}ldap,olcOverlay={1}chain,olcDatabase={-1}frontend,cn=config objectClass: olcLDAPConfig objectClass: olcChainDatabase olcDatabase: {0}ldap olcDbStartTLS: ldaps starttls=no olcDbRebindAsUser: FALSE olcDbChaseReferrals: TRUE olcDbTFSupport: no olcDbProxyWhoAmI: TRUE olcDbProtocolVersion: 3 olcDbSingleConn: FALSE olcDbCancel: abandon olcDbUseTemporaryConn: FALSE olcDbConnectionPoolMax: 16 olcDbSessionTrackingRequest: FALSE olcDbNoRefs: FALSE olcDbNoUndefFilter: FALSE olcDbOnErr: continue olcDbKeepalive: 0:0:0 dn: olcDatabase={1}ldap,olcOverlay={1}chain,olcDatabase={-1}frontend,cn=config objectClass: olcLDAPConfig objectClass: olcChainDatabase olcDatabase: {1}ldap olcDbURI: “{REDACTED URI 1}“ olcDbStartTLS: ldaps starttls=no tls_cacert=“/{REDACTED}/openldap/tls/ cacerts.cer" tls_reqcert=demand tls_crlcheck=none olcDbIDAssertBind: mode=self flags=prescriptive,proxy-authz-non-critical bindm ethod=simple timeout=0 network-timeout=0 binddn={REDACTED} credentials={REDACTED} keepalive=0:0:0 olcDbRebindAsUser: FALSE olcDbChaseReferrals: TRUE olcDbTFSupport: no olcDbProxyWhoAmI: TRUE olcDbProtocolVersion: 3 olcDbSingleConn: FALSE olcDbCancel: abandon olcDbUseTemporaryConn: FALSE olcDbConnectionPoolMax: 16 olcDbSessionTrackingRequest: FALSE olcDbNoRefs: FALSE olcDbNoUndefFilter: FALSE olcDbOnErr: continue olcDbKeepalive: 0:0:0 dn: olcDatabase={2}ldap,olcOverlay={1}chain,olcDatabase={-1}frontend,cn=config objectClass: olcLDAPConfig objectClass: olcChainDatabase olcDatabase: {2}ldap olcDbURI: “{REDACTED URI 2}“ olcDbStartTLS: ldaps starttls=no tls_cacert=“/{REDACTED}/openldap/tls/ cacerts.cer" tls_reqcert=demand tls_crlcheck=none olcDbIDAssertBind: mode=self flags=prescriptive,proxy-authz-non-critical bindm ethod=simple timeout=0 network-timeout=0 binddn={REDACTED} credentials={REDACTED} keepalive=0:0:0 olcDbRebindAsUser: FALSE olcDbChaseReferrals: TRUE olcDbTFSupport: no olcDbProxyWhoAmI: TRUE olcDbProtocolVersion: 3 olcDbSingleConn: FALSE olcDbCancel: abandon olcDbUseTemporaryConn: FALSE olcDbConnectionPoolMax: 16 olcDbSessionTrackingRequest: FALSE olcDbNoRefs: FALSE olcDbNoUndefFilter: FALSE olcDbOnErr: continue olcDbKeepalive: 0:0:0 dn: olcDatabase={3}ldap,olcOverlay={1}chain,olcDatabase={-1}frontend,cn=config objectClass: olcLDAPConfig objectClass: olcChainDatabase olcDatabase: {3}ldap olcDbURI: “{REDACTED URI 3}“ olcDbStartTLS: ldaps starttls=no tls_cacert=“/{REDACTED}/openldap/tls/ cacerts.cer" tls_reqcert=demand tls_crlcheck=none olcDbIDAssertBind: mode=self flags=prescriptive,proxy-authz-non-critical bindm ethod=simple timeout=0 network-timeout=0 binddn={REDACTED} credentials={REDACTED} keepalive=0:0:0 olcDbRebindAsUser: FALSE olcDbChaseReferrals: TRUE olcDbTFSupport: no olcDbProxyWhoAmI: TRUE olcDbProtocolVersion: 3 olcDbSingleConn: FALSE olcDbCancel: abandon olcDbUseTemporaryConn: FALSE olcDbConnectionPoolMax: 16 olcDbSessionTrackingRequest: FALSE olcDbNoRefs: FALSE olcDbNoUndefFilter: FALSE olcDbOnErr: continue olcDbKeepalive: 0:0:0 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 12

[Bug 9248] New: argon2 Makefile detects prefix incorrectly
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9248 Bug ID: 9248 Summary: argon2 Makefile detects prefix incorrectly Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.50 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: contrib Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ryan(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- argon2 tries to auto-detect the prefix from the core Makefile, but gets it slightly wrong. $ make DESTDIR=/home/ryan/tmp/sysroot install mkdir -p /home/ryan/tmp/sysroot`grep -e "^prefix =" ../../../../Makefile | cut -d= -f2`/libexec/openldap mkdir: cannot create directory ‘/usr/libexec’: Permission denied make: *** [Makefile:63: install-lib] Error 1 $ grep -e "^prefix =" ../../../../Makefile | cut -d= -f2 /usr $ grep -e "^prefix =" ../../../../Makefile prefix = /usr The problem is the space after the equals sign. I'd probably just remove this auto-detection and default it to prefix=/usr/local, like every other contrib Makefile does, for the sake of simplicity. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 9227] New: Fix syncrepl exattrs to not delete local attrs
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9227 Bug ID: 9227 Summary: Fix syncrepl exattrs to not delete local attrs Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.50 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- An issue with syncrepl using exattrs is that the local replica may delete attrs that are being managed by locally deployed overlays such as memberOf (See bug#7400 for example). This behavior needs to be fixed so that the locally managed attributes are not deleted when included in an exattrs statement. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 8

[Issue 9083] Broken link in the list of commercial support partners
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9083 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7573] back-perl not working with cn=config
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7573 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7501] added TCP keepalive support to back_ldap
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7501 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9121] dynlist enhancements
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '20

19 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9121 --- Comment #7 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Commits: • 12e11c9b by Howard Chu at 2020-08-18T23:49:26+00:00 ITS#9121 slapo-dynlist, -memberof: define memberOf if needed Ignore if it's defined already. Make it no-user-mod. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 8702] SLAPD_MAX_DAEMON_THREADS is too small
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Aug '20

18 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8702 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |TEST Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED See Also| |https://bugs.openldap.org/s | |how_bug.cgi?id=7926 Keywords|OL_2_5_REQ | --- Comment #2 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Fixed as a part of ITS#7926 Commits: • 2f94318f by Howard Chu at 2020-08-18T22:00:58+01:00 ITS#7926 support multiple config cleanup functions per op Prep for main changes • 9d2f1530 by Howard Chu at 2020-08-18T22:37:50+01:00 ITS#7926 dynamic changes to olcListenerThreads Reallocates sockets from old to new listener threads -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7926] modifying olcListenerThreads crashes slapd
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Aug '20

18 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7926 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- See Also| |https://bugs.openldap.org/s | |how_bug.cgi?id=8702 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7926] modifying olcListenerThreads crashes slapd
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 18 Aug '20

18 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7926 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |TEST Keywords|OL_2_5_REQ | Status|CONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Commits: • 2f94318f by Howard Chu at 2020-08-18T22:00:58+01:00 ITS#7926 support multiple config cleanup functions per op Prep for main changes • 9d2f1530 by Howard Chu at 2020-08-18T22:37:50+01:00 ITS#7926 dynamic changes to olcListenerThreads Reallocates sockets from old to new listener threads -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

How to Add Tag in Website
by Anuj jindal 18 Aug '20

18 Aug '20

In our last blog we discussed the UGC NET JRF Eligibility Criteria (UGC NET JRF Admit Card, Eligibility Criteria & Exam Result). Hence the checklist for you to know your eligibility, let’s discuss the checklist of the UGC NET JRF exam that checks your efficiency. <a href="https://www.anujjindal.in/ugc-net-apply-online-syllabus-selection-criteria/">UGC NET JRF Selection Criteria</a>

1 0

[Issue 9135] mdb index corruption during legitimate delete
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Aug '20

13 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9135 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords|OL_2_5_REQ | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9135] mdb index corruption during legitimate delete
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Aug '20

13 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9135 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|FIXED |TEST --- Comment #2 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- Commits: • b0d73083 by Howard Chu at 2020-08-13T18:18:45+01:00 ITS#9135 fix index error on collapsed range -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9135] mdb index corruption during legitimate delete
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Aug '20

13 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9135 Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #1 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> --- (In reply to Konstantin Andreev from comment #0) > Full_Name: Konstantin Andreev > Version: 2.4.48, git/master/44a7b46/20191203 > OS: Solaris 11.3 x64 > URL: > Submission from: (NULL) (79.135.238.172) > > > Here is a test case. > > 1) choose an attribute that has an equality index in your dit; > > 2) for this attribute choose a value that does not (and did not) exist in > the dit yet; > > Let assume you chose [o=1] attr/val pair. > > 3) add MDB_IDL_DB_MAX+1 ( = 0x10000 = 65536 ) entries having [o=1] > attr/val > pair. > > 4) delete last MDB_IDL_DB_MAX-1 of them in the order inverted as > compared to > the order of addition > > Now you have two entries having [o=1] attr/val pair. Let assume they are > > | $ ldapsearch -s sub -b 'ou=T' '(o=1)' o > | dn: cn=1,ou=T > | o: 1 > | > | dn: cn=2,ou=T > | o: 1 > > 5) delete one of the remaining entries, e.g. cn=2,ou=T > > Repeat the search: > > | $ ldapsearch -s sub -b 'ou=T' '(o=1)' o > | $ > > Nope, the remaining entry has been lost from the index forever. But it is > still > in the dit: > > | $ ldapsearch -s one -b 'ou=T' '(objectclass=*)' o > | dn: cn=1,ou=T > | o: 1 > | > | dn: ou=A,ou=T > | ... > > You need to slapindex to restore `o' index to a valid state, but you may not > know you need to repair the index. > > The probability of this scenario is negligible, because indexed entries never > form continuous block of ids of many-thousand length, but the code for this > scenario exists and has a bug. Thanks for the report. Fixed now in master. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 9312] New: Getting connection_read(23): no connection!
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9312 Issue ID: 9312 Summary: Getting connection_read(23): no connection! Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.44 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: shaheena.kazi(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Hi, I have a connection_read(23): no connection! message in my syslog. This does not affect the functionality of anything on system but is simply present in the logs. Also, it comes randomly. No wrong password error or no such issues. I have referred the ID's - 8781 and 6548. But it does not help. Secondly, I have updated the consolidated patch for the openldap version from the openldap/patches website. that too does not help. We want to know why this messages come in the logs ? Regarding, This commonly occurs when a client ends the connection without properly ending an unbind request first. The solution would be to fix the client involved. -- What does the client server need to do here ? I mean what is to be handled correctly ? Is there any configuration miss ? Awaiting your response. - Shaheena K -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

[Issue 9313] New: TLS 1.3 Support on 2.4.44
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9313 Issue ID: 9313 Summary: TLS 1.3 Support on 2.4.44 Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.44 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: shaheena.kazi(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Hello, I wanted to know if TLSv1.3 is supported on openldap 2.4.44 If no, then what about on openldap 2.4.47 ? Awaiting your response. Regards, Shaheena K -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

Nabard Grade A Syllabus
by Anuj jindal 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

NABARD Grade A officer post is one such post which is a dream of a lot of people. You get to make policies for the backbone of the country “agriculture”. You can look at the job profile of a NABARD Grade A Officer. It is really interesting. The salary of a NABARD Grade A officer is good and its syllabus is similar to that of RBI & SEBI. You can go through NABARD Grade A salary here. In this blog, I’m essentially going to talk about five things: <a href="https://www.anujjindal.in/nabard-grade-a-selection-criteria-syllabus-cut-of…">NABARD Grade A Selection Criteria </a>

1 0

[Issue 9171] slapd with ppolicy and pwdAccountLockedTime crashes
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 10 Aug '20

10 Aug '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9171 Ondřej Kuzník <ondra(a)mistotebe.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- See Also| |https://bugs.openldap.org/s | |how_bug.cgi?id=9309 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs