https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9823
Issue ID: 9823
Summary: syncprov doesn't fallback when deltasync consumer's
offline beyond accesslog depth
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.1
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: smckinney(a)symas.com
Target Milestone: ---
Configured w/ deltasync. When a consumer goes offline for a duration exceeding
the the logpurge interval, won't fallback into syncrepl, resulting in a dsync.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10178
Issue ID: 10178
Summary: deltaMPR conflict resolution issues
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review, replication
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 1013
--> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1013&action=edit
Illustation environment
When a data conflict is introduced (multiple writes to the same entry in
different providers), there are three different strategies and they are
incompatible, see the attached test script for an example.
1. DeltaMPR providers have access to accesslog and reinterpret the operation as
if it happened in CSN order
2. Delta consumers (olcMultiProvider: FALSE) have the above code disabled so
have to accept the accesslog entry as-is, but the entry represents the
original, not reinterpreted write
3. plain syncrepl - just ignores the out of order version
This *cannot* (and does not) mesh well as at least 1. and 3. are always around
in deltaMPR.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10163
Issue ID: 10163
Summary: Cleanup configure/test integration
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.6
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: build
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
The sed commandline configure uses to perform substitutions is getting unwieldy
and may be exceeding platform limits on various systems.
All of the BUILD_xxx substitutions for overlays are only used in tests/run.in.
They could be completely removed, and instead each of the enabled overlays
could be emitted into a separate file that just gets included by the test
scripts. There's no need for them to be part of the sed invocation at all.
There's also leftover BUILD_xxx cruft from backends that we've removed (e.g.
back-shell BUILD_SHELL) that nothing else in the tree references any more.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10174
Issue ID: 10174
Summary: Fails to authenticate user against Active directory if
double space is present in the user's DN in AD
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.4.44
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: codedriller(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
In a proxy configuration when using Meta backend to connect to Active
directory, an AD user can't be authenticated through OpenLDAP if there is a
double space somewhere in his or her Active directory's DN, for example:
CN=John Doe,OU=IT Department,DC=example,DC=com.
I'm no LDAP expert but I suppose that the reason for this is that after slapd
does initial samAccountName search, it normalizes the found DN including
removing a double space according to RFC 2252 paragraph 8.1., then the bind
attempt is made using the normalized DN and it fails, because Active directory
has no built-in double space removal (or it can be disabled somehow), and the
normalized DN does not match the real DN in Active directory. Excuse me if my
usage of LDAP terms is not accurate.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5625
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |2.7.0
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Resolution|SUSPENDED |---
Status|VERIFIED |UNCONFIRMED
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7400
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|VERIFIED |UNCONFIRMED
Target Milestone|--- |2.6.8
Resolution|WONTFIX |---
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |2.6.8
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|VERIFIED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|WONTFIX |---
--- Comment #19 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
Looking to fix memberOf rather than deprecate, re-opening
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9795
Issue ID: 9795
Summary: Remove memberof overlay
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.1
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: overlays
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
The memberof overlay was deprecated with the release of OpenLDAP 2.5. It
should be removed prior for the next minor release (i.e., 2.7)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249
--- Comment #18 from OndÅ™ej KuznÃk <ondra(a)mistotebe.net> ---
Looking at the Arch patch, might be related to ITS#10135?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.