openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
21001 discussions

Re: [JunkMail] Re: (ITS#5383) olc* not present in subschema subentry
by michael＠stroeder.com 19 Feb '08

19 Feb '08

Howard Chu wrote: > Michael Ströder wrote: >> Howard Chu wrote: >>> In RE24 the config schema are only exposed for DEVEL builds. >> >> Why that? Especially why was it changed compared to RE23? > > They were probably exposed in RE23 by mistake. Another option would be to completely disable the subschema subentry for back-config. In this case users of web2ldap could work around it by using a locally stored schema LDIF file for back-config. Ciao, Michael.

1 0

Re: (ITS#5386) Bad value of entryUUID in filter crashes slapd
by ando＠sys-net.it 18 Feb '08

18 Feb '08

silk(a)boktor.net wrote: > If client sends a filter that lookups entries based on entryUUID, and the value > of entryUUID is invalid (eg. not properly formed) slapd dies with an assertion. Fixed in HEAD (servers/slapd/filter.c 1.148->1.149) Please test. p. Ing. Pierangelo Masarati OpenLDAP Core Team SysNet s.r.l. via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA http://www.sys-net.it --------------------------------------- Office: +39 02 23998309 Mobile: +39 333 4963172 Email: pierangelo.masarati(a)sys-net.it ---------------------------------------

1 0

Re: (ITS#5385) contextCSN not propagated in cascading syncrepl refreshAndPersist
by hyc＠symas.com 18 Feb '08

18 Feb '08

bgmilne(a)staff.telkomsa.net wrote: > Full_Name: Buchan Milne > Version: OPENLDAP_REL_ENG_2_3 > OS: Linux 2.6 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (196.15.129.131) > > > One of our environments does cascading replication of one database (the master > for the other databases in this environment is a syncrepl refreshAndPersist > syncrepl client to a database in another environment). > > We monitor the replication status of all our slaves by comparing the contextCSN > on each database with the contextCSN of the updateref, and I have noticed that > the contextCSN on the cascaded replicas is not being updated, even though the > entries have been replicated (according to logging at sync level on these > slaves). All other replication (including non-cascaded refreshAndPersist > databases) works fine. All the servers in question are currently on 2.3.40. > > It seems that the issue can be reproduced with current REL_ENG_2_3, with a > slight modification to test019 (see patch below) to include the contextCSN in > the comparison, which will then fail as follows: I've reproduced this issue in RE23 as well. I note that there's no such problem with RE24. If we can't track this down easily I'm inclined to just ignore it. -- -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

(ITS#5386) Bad value of entryUUID in filter crashes slapd
by silk＠boktor.net 18 Feb '08

18 Feb '08

Full_Name: Grzegorz Sobanski Version: 2.4.7(-5) OS: Debain unstable URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (150.254.130.134) If client sends a filter that lookups entries based on entryUUID, and the value of entryUUID is invalid (eg. not properly formed) slapd dies with an assertion. Example filter: (entryUUID=baka) Steps to reproduce: ldapsearch -x "(entryUUID=baka)" Reproducible: always Error logged by slapd: slapd: /home/devel/openldap/build-area/openldap2.3-2.4.7/servers/slapd/schema_init.c:2537: UUIDNormalize: Assertion `val->bv_len == 16' failed. Expected behaviour: Server does not dies, and: - backwards compatible: filter on entryUUID is skipped - not backward compatible: client is informed about malformed search filter If any more information or tests are needed, please ask.

1 0

ITS#5375
by ecizaguirre＠gmv.com 18 Feb '08

18 Feb '08

Hi again Pierangelo and Quanah, I have tested the REL_ENG_2_4 version with the fix under heavy worload and it seems to be working correctly so the problem is fixed. I'm still not able to compile 2.4.7 version with the fix applied. Thanks for all and for this great software. Cheers. Eduardo ______________________ Este mensaje, y en su caso, cualquier fichero anexo al mismo, puede contener informacion clasificada por su emisor como confidencial en el marco de su Sistema de Gestion de Seguridad de la Informacion siendo para uso exclusivo del destinatario, quedando prohibida su divulgacion copia o distribucion a terceros sin la autorizacion expresa del remitente. Si Vd. ha recibido este mensaje erroneamente, se ruega lo notifique al remitente y proceda a su borrado. Gracias por su colaboracion. ______________________ This message including any attachments may contain confidential information, according to our Information Security Management System, and intended solely for a specific individual to whom they are addressed. Any unauthorised copy, disclosure or distribution of this message is strictly forbidden. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it. ______________________

1 0

Re: (ITS#5383) olc* not present in subschema subentry
by michael＠stroeder.com 18 Feb '08

18 Feb '08

Howard Chu wrote: > Michael Ströder wrote: >> Howard Chu wrote: >>> In RE24 the config schema are only exposed for DEVEL builds. >> >> Why that? Especially why was it changed compared to RE23? > > They were probably exposed in RE23 by mistake. The config schema uses an > OID from the OpenLDAP Experimental arc and the Project's policy is not > to publish experimental OIDs for general use, only for Development. But then back-config SHOULD be hidden by DEVEL as well. Frankly no-one will ever recognize when you change an OID arc. There would be no issues with LDAP clients at all. > Given that things in cn=config have pretty much stabilized, we probably > ought to have migrated to a non-experimental arc for RE24. Yes, please. Given that back-config is endorsed to be deployed in production schema-aware LDAP clients must have the chance to retrieve required information for processing the data. > Note that the cn=config schema still relies on an unfinished spec > (draft-chu-ldap-xordered) and that needs to be finalized still. Whatever "unfinished" means. From the IETF point-of-view this is simply a proprietary feature not documented anywhere in the IETF process so far. From OpenLDAP project point-of-view it is yet another not fully documented feature. This is not a real issue which should hold back providing the schema to the client. But if back-config is activated in normal builds then the interface definition SHOULD be complete which includes providing the relevant schema information in subschema subentry. Ciao, Michael.

1 0

(ITS#5385) contextCSN not propagated in cascading syncrepl refreshAndPersist
by bgmilne＠staff.telkomsa.net 18 Feb '08

18 Feb '08

Full_Name: Buchan Milne Version: OPENLDAP_REL_ENG_2_3 OS: Linux 2.6 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (196.15.129.131) One of our environments does cascading replication of one database (the master for the other databases in this environment is a syncrepl refreshAndPersist syncrepl client to a database in another environment). We monitor the replication status of all our slaves by comparing the contextCSN on each database with the contextCSN of the updateref, and I have noticed that the contextCSN on the cascaded replicas is not being updated, even though the entries have been replicated (according to logging at sync level on these slaves). All other replication (including non-cascaded refreshAndPersist databases) works fine. All the servers in question are currently on 2.3.40. It seems that the issue can be reproduced with current REL_ENG_2_3, with a slight modification to test019 (see patch below) to include the contextCSN in the comparison, which will then fail as follows: $ ./run test019 Running ./scripts/test019-syncreplication-cascade... running defines.sh Starting master slapd on TCP/IP port 9011... Using ldapsearch to check that master slapd (pid=23363) is running... Using ldapadd to create the context prefix entry in the master... Starting R1 slave slapd on TCP/IP port 9012... Using ldapsearch to check that R1 slave slapd (pid=23370) is running... Starting R2 slave slapd on TCP/IP port 9013... Using ldapsearch to check that R2 slave slapd (pid=23376) is running... Starting P1 slave slapd on TCP/IP port 9014... Using ldapsearch to check that P1 slave slapd (pid=23382) is running... Starting P2 slave slapd on TCP/IP port 9015... Using ldapsearch to check that P2 slave slapd (pid=23388) is running... Starting P3 slave slapd on TCP/IP port 9016... Using ldapsearch to check that P3 slave slapd (pid=23395) is running... Using ldapadd to populate the master directory... Waiting 25 seconds for syncrepl to receive changes... Using ldapmodify to modify master directory... Waiting 25 seconds for syncrepl to receive changes... Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the master... Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the R1 slave... Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the R2 slave... Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the P1 slave... Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the P2 slave... Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the P3 slave... Filtering master ldapsearch results... Filtering R1 slave ldapsearch results... Filtering R2 slave ldapsearch results... Filtering P1 slave ldapsearch results... Filtering P2 slave ldapsearch results... Filtering P3 slave ldapsearch results... Comparing retrieved entries from master and R1 slave... Comparing retrieved entries from master and R2 slave... Comparing retrieved entries from master and P1 slave... Comparing retrieved entries from master and P2 slave... test failed - master and P2 slave databases differ $ diff -u testrun/server{1,5}.flt --- testrun/server1.flt 2008-02-18 12:00:52.000000000 +0200 +++ testrun/server5.flt 2008-02-18 12:00:52.000000000 +0200 @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ postalAddress: Example, Inc. $ 535 W. William St. $ Anytown, MI 48109 $ US telephoneNumber: +1 313 555 1817 associatedDomain: example.com -contextCSN: 20080218100027Z#000002#00#000000 +contextCSN: 20080218100027Z#000000#00#000000 dn: cn=Gern Jensen,ou=Information Technology Division,ou=People,dc=example,dc= com Index: scripts/test019-syncreplication-cascade =================================================================== RCS file: /repo/OpenLDAP/pkg/ldap/tests/scripts/test019-syncreplication-cascade,v retrieving revision 1.13.2.7 diff -u -r1.13.2.7 test019-syncreplication-cascade --- scripts/test019-syncreplication-cascade 11 Feb 2008 23:24:28 -0000 1.13.2.7 +++ scripts/test019-syncreplication-cascade 18 Feb 2008 10:02:51 -0000 @@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ echo "Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the master..." $LDAPSEARCH -S "" -b "$BASEDN" -h $LOCALHOST -p $PORT1 \ - 'objectclass=*' > $MASTEROUT 2>&1 + 'objectclass=*' '*' contextCSN > $MASTEROUT 2>&1 RC=$? if test $RC != 0 ; then @@ -342,7 +342,7 @@ echo "Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the R1 slave..." $LDAPSEARCH -S "" -b "$BASEDN" -h $LOCALHOST -p $PORT2 \ - 'objectclass=*' > $SERVER2OUT 2>&1 + 'objectclass=*' '*' contextCSN > $SERVER2OUT 2>&1 RC=$? if test $RC != 0 ; then @@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ echo "Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the R2 slave..." $LDAPSEARCH -S "" -b "$BASEDN" -h $LOCALHOST -p $PORT3 \ - 'objectclass=*' > $SERVER3OUT 2>&1 + 'objectclass=*' '*' contextCSN > $SERVER3OUT 2>&1 RC=$? if test $RC != 0 ; then @@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ echo "Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the P1 slave..." $LDAPSEARCH -S "" -b "$BASEDN" -h $LOCALHOST -p $PORT4 \ - 'objectclass=*' > $SERVER4OUT 2>&1 + 'objectclass=*' '*' contextCSN > $SERVER4OUT 2>&1 RC=$? if test $RC != 0 ; then @@ -375,7 +375,7 @@ echo "Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the P2 slave..." $LDAPSEARCH -S "" -b "$BASEDN" -h $LOCALHOST -p $PORT5 \ - 'objectclass=*' > $SERVER5OUT 2>&1 + 'objectclass=*' '*' contextCSN > $SERVER5OUT 2>&1 RC=$? if test $RC != 0 ; then @@ -386,7 +386,7 @@ echo "Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from the P3 slave..." $LDAPSEARCH -S "" -b "$BASEDN" -h $LOCALHOST -p $PORT6 \ - 'objectclass=*' > $SERVER6OUT 2>&1 + 'objectclass=*' '*' contextCSN > $SERVER6OUT 2>&1 RC=$? if test $RC != 0 ; then

1 0

Re: [JunkMail] Re: (ITS#5383) olc* not present in subschema subentry
by hyc＠symas.com 17 Feb '08

17 Feb '08

Michael Ströder wrote: > Howard Chu wrote: >> In RE24 the config schema are only exposed for DEVEL builds. > > Why that? Especially why was it changed compared to RE23? They were probably exposed in RE23 by mistake. The config schema uses an OID from the OpenLDAP Experimental arc and the Project's policy is not to publish experimental OIDs for general use, only for Development. Given that things in cn=config have pretty much stabilized, we probably ought to have migrated to a non-experimental arc for RE24. I suppose we can take this ITS as a reminder to do that. Note that the cn=config schema still relies on an unfinished spec (draft-chu-ldap-xordered) and that needs to be finalized still. -- -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

(ITS#5384) access control: "attrs" field handled incorrectly in URI form of sets
by ando＠sys-net.it 17 Feb '08

17 Feb '08

Full_Name: Pierangelo Masarati Version: HEAD/re24/re23 OS: irrelevant URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (81.72.89.40) Submitted by: ando There seems to be an error in (optional) attribute handling in URIs used in sets. Background: in OpenLDAP 2.3 sets were enhanced by allowing to dereference URIs by performing the corresponding internal search; the syntax was: [<uri>]/<attr> returning the value of <attr> after searching for <uri>; if optional attrs were specified in the URI, their values could be added to the result set; so [ldap:///o=suffix?cn,sn?sub]/uid would have collected the "cn", the "sn" and the "uid" of entries matching the URI. Well, this is broken: it seems to only work as expected when no optional attrs are given. A fix for HEAD is about to come. p.

1 0

Re: (ITS#5383) olc* not present in subschema subentry
by michael＠stroeder.com 17 Feb '08

17 Feb '08

Howard Chu wrote: > > In RE24 the config schema are only exposed for DEVEL builds. Why that? Especially why was it changed compared to RE23? Ciao, Michael.

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs