openldap-technical July 2012

openldap-technical@openldap.org

69 participants
71 discussions

Virtual list view problem
by Venish Khant 31 May '16

31 May '16

Hi all I am using cpan Net::LDAP module to access LDAP entries. I want to search LDAP entries using Net::LDAP search method. When I do search, I want some limited number of entries from search result, for this(searching) process I am using Net::LDAP::Control::VLV module. But I get error on VLV response control. Please, any one have idea about this error. * Error:* Died at vlv.pl line 50, This is my example. I changed the font style of line 50 #!/usr/bin/perl -w use Net::LDAP; use Net::LDAP::Control::VLV; use Net::LDAP::Constant qw( LDAP_CONTROL_VLVRESPONSE ); use Net::LDAP::Control::Sort; sub procentry { my ( $mesg, $entry) = @_; # Return if there is no entry to process if ( !defined($entry) ) { return; } print "dn: " . $entry->dn() . "\n"; @attrs = $entry->attributes(); foreach $attr (@attrs) { #printf("\t%s: %s\n", $attr, $entry->get_value($attr)); $attrvalue = $entry->get_value($attr,asref=>1); #print $attr.":". $entry->get_value($attr)."\n"; foreach $value(@$attrvalue) { print "$attr: $value\n"; } } $mesg->pop_entry; print "\n"; } $ldap = Net::LDAP->new( "localhost" ); # Get the first 20 entries $vlv = Net::LDAP::Control::VLV->new( before => 0, # No entries from before target entry after => 19, # 19 entries after target entry content => 0, # List size unknown offset => 1, # Target entry is the first ); my $sort = Net::LDAP::Control::Sort->new( order => 'cn' ); @args = ( base => "dc=example,dc=co,dc=in", scope => "subtree", filter => "(objectClass=inetOrgPerson)", callback => \&procentry, # Call this sub for each entry control => [ $sort, $vlv ], ); $mesg = $ldap->search( @args ); # Get VLV response control *($resp) = $mesg->control( LDAP_CONTROL_VLVRESPONSE ) or die;* $vlv->response( $resp ); # Set the control to get the last 20 entries $vlv->end; $mesg = $ldap->search( @args ); # Get VLV response control ($resp) = $mesg->control( LDAP_CONTROL_VLVRESPONSE ) or die; $vlv->response( $resp ); # Now get the previous page $vlv->scroll_page( -1 ); $mesg = $ldap->search( @args ); # Get VLV response control ($resp) = $mes # Now page with first entry starting with "B" in the middle $vlv->before(9); # Change page to show 9 before $vlv->after(10); # Change page to show 10 after $vlv->assert("B"); # assert "B" $mesg = $ldap->search( @args );g->control( LDAP_CONTROL_VLVRESPONSE ) or die; $vlv->response( $resp ); -- Venish Khant www.deeproot.co.in

4 11

OpenLDAP and dynalogin (two-factor auth with HOTP)
by Daniel Pocock 29 Jun '15

29 Jun '15

Some time ago I created the dynalogin ( http://www.dynalogin.org ) solution for two-factor authentication. I'm just contemplating how to make it easier to integrate, and making it convenient to use with OpenLDAP seems like a good strategy: can anyone comment on that? The initial thoughts that I have about the subject: - SASL based solution (dynalogin has digest capability already, so it could be adapted for SASL PLAIN or DIGEST-MD5) - should not prevent password logins (user should be able to use either password or HOTP code) - should enable people to use it indirectly (e.g. if someone already has pam_ldap working, they should be able to add dynalogin to their OpenLDAP server and get immediate benefit) - use cases: UNIX login, high-security webmail login, VPN and OpenID provider backed by OpenLDAP I know that SASL already supports OTP, but that is not HOTP, it is OPIE (or S/Key) RFC 2289: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2289 whereas HOTP is RFC 4226: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4226.txt HOTP is considered more secure and more widely implemented.

5 6

memberOf data in new replica servers 2.4.31
by Todd Stein 02 Nov '12

02 Nov '12

Hi, I have a provider server and five consumer servers, all of which have the memberOf overlay configured: overlay memberof memberof-group-oc groupOfUniqueNames memberof-member-ad uniqueMember memberof-refint true memberof-dangling ignore syncrepl rid=005 provider=ldap://<server>:389 type=refreshAndPersist interval=00:00:05:00 retry="60 10 600 +" searchbase="dc=<removed>,dc=<removed>" filter="(objectClass=*)" scope=sub attrs="*" schemachecking=off starttls=no bindmethod=simple binddn="cn=replica,dc=<removed>,dc=<removed>" credentials=<removed> When I bring a new replica online, it appears that entries are replicated in the order that they were created on the provider server which produces many "memberof_value_modify failed err=32" messages in the log, and incomplete memberOf data. To get around this, I wrote a script which empties all groups prior to replication, and then recreates the memberships after the initial replication. This seems to work, but is hardly ideal. Is there a "more correct" way of replicating memberOf values without manipulating my provider each time I bring up a new consumer? Thank you very much, Todd

2 1

ldapsearch SASL/GSSAPI bind really slow
by Matthew B. Brookover 05 Sep '12

05 Sep '12

I am upgrading the openldap servers and ran into a bit of a problem. SASL/GSSAPI binds to the new server are too slow. An ldapsearch to the old server using GSSAPI to bind is much faster on the old server then the same search on the new server. I am not even sure where to start to debug this and am hoping that some one will have some ideas. First off, here are a few details: The old LDAP server is running Openldap 2.3.43 on CentOS 5.2 with the CentOS built MIT Kerberos(1.6.1) and saslauthd (2.1.22). This server is configured with the slapd.conf file. The host name is infinite.mines.edu in the example runs below. The new LDAP server is running Openldap 2.4.31 on CentOS 6.3 with the CentOS built MIT Kerberos (1.9) and saslauthd (2.1.23). This server is configured with slapd-config (new dynamic configuration is very cool!) The host name is infinte-temp.mines.edu in the example runs below. Both the old and new servers are configured to use SASL for GSSAPI and for simple binds. First test, simple bind to new server and then the old server: [testua@merlin ~]$ time ldapsearch -LLL -ZZ -Duid=testua,ou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu -y passwd -x -Hldap://infinite-temp.mines.edu/ -bou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid=testua dn: uid=testua,ou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid: testua cn: estua, t objectClass: account objectClass: posixAccount objectClass: top objectClass: shadowAccount shadowLastChange: 12780 shadowMax: 99999 shadowWarning: 7 loginShell: /bin/bash gidNumber: 11192 host: imagine.mines.edu gecos: estua, t homeDirectory: /u/ca/fl/testua userPassword:: e1NBU0x9dGVzdHVhQE1JTkVTLkVEVQ== uidNumber: 11192 real 0m0.324s user 0m0.017s sys 0m0.004s [testua@merlin ~]$ time ldapsearch -LLL -ZZ -Duid=testua,ou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu -y passwd -x -Hldap://infinite.mines.edu/ -bou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid=testua dn: uid=testua,ou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid: testua cn: estua, t objectClass: account objectClass: posixAccount objectClass: top objectClass: shadowAccount shadowLastChange: 12780 shadowMax: 99999 shadowWarning: 7 loginShell: /bin/bash gidNumber: 11192 host: imagine.mines.edu gecos: estua, t homeDirectory: /u/ca/fl/testua userPassword:: e1NBU0x9dGVzdHVhQE1JTkVTLkVEVQ== uidNumber: 11192 real 0m0.163s user 0m0.016s sys 0m0.004s [testua@merlin ~]$ As you can see, the new server takes nearly twice as long to perform the search as the old server. Both servers are using saslauthd to send the password to Kerberos for authentication. Next test, GSSAPI bind to the new server and then the old server: [testua@merlin ~]$ kinit Password for testua(a)MINES.EDU: [testua@merlin ~]$ klist Ticket cache: FILE:/tmp/krb5cc_11192_d1yOuC Default principal: testua(a)MINES.EDU Valid starting Expires Service principal 07/25/12 13:32:11 07/26/12 04:32:11 krbtgt/MINES.EDU(a)MINES.EDU renew until 07/26/12 13:32:07 Kerberos 4 ticket cache: /tmp/tkt11192 klist: You have no tickets cached [testua@merlin ~]$ time ldapsearch -LLL -ZZ -Hldap://infinite-temp.mines.edu/ -bou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid=testua SASL/GSSAPI authentication started SASL username: testua(a)MINES.EDU SASL SSF: 56 SASL data security layer installed. dn: uid=testua,ou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid: testua cn: estua, t objectClass: account objectClass: posixAccount objectClass: top objectClass: shadowAccount shadowLastChange: 12780 shadowMax: 99999 shadowWarning: 7 loginShell: /bin/bash gidNumber: 11192 host: imagine.mines.edu gecos: estua, t homeDirectory: /u/ca/fl/testua userPassword:: e1NBU0x9dGVzdHVhQE1JTkVTLkVEVQ== uidNumber: 11192 real 0m1.145s user 0m0.021s sys 0m0.004s [testua@merlin ~]$ time ldapsearch -LLL -ZZ -Hldap://infinite.mines.edu/ -bou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid=testua SASL/GSSAPI authentication started SASL username: testua(a)MINES.EDU SASL SSF: 56 SASL data security layer installed. dn: uid=testua,ou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid: testua cn: estua, t objectClass: account objectClass: posixAccount objectClass: top objectClass: shadowAccount shadowLastChange: 12780 shadowMax: 99999 shadowWarning: 7 loginShell: /bin/bash gidNumber: 11192 host: imagine.mines.edu gecos: estua, t homeDirectory: /u/ca/fl/testua userPassword:: e1NBU0x9dGVzdHVhQE1JTkVTLkVEVQ== uidNumber: 11192 real 0m0.123s user 0m0.021s sys 0m0.003s [testua@merlin ~]$ klist Ticket cache: FILE:/tmp/krb5cc_11192_d1yOuC Default principal: testua(a)MINES.EDU Valid starting Expires Service principal 07/25/12 13:32:11 07/26/12 04:32:11 krbtgt/MINES.EDU(a)MINES.EDU renew until 07/26/12 13:32:07 07/25/12 13:32:33 07/26/12 04:32:11 ldap/infinite-temp.mines.edu(a)MINES.EDU renew until 07/26/12 13:32:07 07/25/12 13:32:41 07/26/12 04:32:11 ldap/infinite.mines.edu(a)MINES.EDU renew until 07/26/12 13:32:07 Kerberos 4 ticket cache: /tmp/tkt11192 klist: You have no tickets cached [testua@merlin ~]$ The old server is 9 times faster then the new server. This last test is to show that an anonymous bind is very fast and indicates to me that the network, BDB, caching, etc are not the issue. This test is to both servers, using a simple bind, first the old server and then the new server: [testua@merlin ~]$ time ldapsearch -LLL -ZZ -x -Hldap://infinite.mines.edu/ -bou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid=testua dn: uid=testua,ou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid: testua cn: estua, t objectClass: account objectClass: posixAccount objectClass: top objectClass: shadowAccount shadowLastChange: 12780 shadowMax: 99999 shadowWarning: 7 loginShell: /bin/bash gidNumber: 11192 host: imagine.mines.edu gecos: estua, t homeDirectory: /u/ca/fl/testua userPassword:: e1NBU0x9dGVzdHVhQE1JTkVTLkVEVQ== uidNumber: 11192 real 0m0.049s user 0m0.017s sys 0m0.005s [testua@merlin ~]$ time ldapsearch -LLL -ZZ -x -Hldap://infinite-temp.mines.edu/ -bou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid=testua dn: uid=testua,ou=People,dc=mines,dc=edu uid: testua cn: estua, t objectClass: account objectClass: posixAccount objectClass: top objectClass: shadowAccount shadowLastChange: 12780 shadowMax: 99999 shadowWarning: 7 loginShell: /bin/bash gidNumber: 11192 host: imagine.mines.edu gecos: estua, t homeDirectory: /u/ca/fl/testua userPassword:: e1NBU0x9dGVzdHVhQE1JTkVTLkVEVQ== uidNumber: 11192 real 0m0.029s user 0m0.014s sys 0m0.006s [testua@merlin ~]$ When using an anonymous bind, the old server takes longer then the new server -- which is what I would expect given that the new server has twice the number of faster processors and double the memory of the old server. Any ideas? Thanks! Matt mbrookov(a)mines.edu

2 2

In MirrorMode - proxy or external frontend needed?
by Pieter Baele 03 Sep '12

03 Sep '12

I've 2 servers in MirrorMode, a part of the tree wil also be partially replicated to 3 slaves. Do I really need an LDAP proxy or Load balancer(s) so writes are only directed to one server? In our LDAP, the number of writes will be very very low, most of them will be reads (authentication, ssh keys, puppet nodes...) Any benefit in using 'normal' n multimaster instead of MirrorMode?

4 4

LinuxCon Presentation 2012-08-29
by Howard Chu 30 Aug '12

30 Aug '12

Just FYI, I'll be giving a talk on MDB, OpenLDAP's new memory-mapped database library, at LinuxCon in San Diego next month. http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/linuxcon/schedule Some of the benchmark data I posted here will be part of that talk: http://highlandsun.com/hyc/mdb/microbench/ If you haven't looked into MDB yet, here's your chance to find out all about it! -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

3 3

delta-syncrepl stopped receiving changes
by David Hawes 15 Aug '12

15 Aug '12

My environment consists of 1 provider and 6 consumer machines using delta-syncrepl for replication. For some reason, one of the consumer machines stopped receiving changes for several days and did not resume syncing until a restart (SIGKILL). All machines are running 2.4.30 with BerkeleyDB 4.7.25 (plus patches), the hdb backend, and tcmalloc. I notice that 2.4.31 has several syncrepl fixes, and I intend to upgrade in the near future, but my issue seems different than the ITS issues listed in the change log. I'm posting here to determine if this has been fixed or if I need to create a new ITS issue. When I noticed one of the machines was not syncing properly I first ensured that I could still query it. When I verified that, I decided to change the LogLevel to 'any' to make sure I wasn't missing any logs that would help me figure out what the issue was. Unfortunately, this LDAP modify caused OpenLDAP to hang. The operation never finished, and new queries using ldapsearch would simply hang as well. At this point I got a gdb backtrace and db_stat from BDB. db_stat -c: ===== Default locking region information: 640 Last allocated locker ID 0x7fffffff Current maximum unused locker ID 9 Number of lock modes 3000 Maximum number of locks possible 1500 Maximum number of lockers possible 1500 Maximum number of lock objects possible 80 Number of lock object partitions 47 Number of current locks 1262 Maximum number of locks at any one time 19 Maximum number of locks in any one bucket 0 Maximum number of locks stolen by for an empty partition 0 Maximum number of locks stolen for any one partition 340 Number of current lockers 341 Maximum number of lockers at any one time 44 Number of current lock objects 683 Maximum number of lock objects at any one time 6 Maximum number of lock objects in any one bucket 0 Maximum number of objects stolen by for an empty partition 0 Maximum number of objects stolen for any one partition 3799M Total number of locks requested (3799770221) 3799M Total number of locks released (3799714045) 0 Total number of locks upgraded 73 Total number of locks downgraded 73M Lock requests not available due to conflicts, for which we waited (73026840) 5165 Lock requests not available due to conflicts, for which we did not wait 50963 Number of deadlocks 0 Lock timeout value 0 Number of locks that have timed out 0 Transaction timeout value 0 Number of transactions that have timed out 1MB 400KB The size of the lock region 70M The number of partition locks that required waiting (1%) 15M The maximum number of times any partition lock was waited for (0%) 15018 The number of object queue operations that required waiting (0%) 54M The number of locker allocations that required waiting (2%) 0 The number of region locks that required waiting (0%) 6 Maximum hash bucket length ===== The number of deadlocks was pretty shocking; I've never seen that value non-zero. I also have db_stat -C A output if that helps. gdb (syncrepl thread): ===== Thread 12 (Thread 0x444a9950 (LWP 16336)): #0 0x00007f5e087f2b99 in pthread_cond_wait@@GLIBC_2.3.2 () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #1 0x00007f5e08a274fb in __db_pthread_mutex_lock () from /apps/local/depend/BerkeleyDB-4.7.25p4/lib/libdb-4.7.so #2 0x00007f5e08aa5dec in __lock_get_internal () from /apps/local/depend/BerkeleyDB-4.7.25p4/lib/libdb-4.7.so #3 0x00007f5e08aa6d6a in __lock_vec () from /apps/local/depend/BerkeleyDB-4.7.25p4/lib/libdb-4.7.so #4 0x00007f5e08aa72db in __lock_vec_pp () from /apps/local/depend/BerkeleyDB-4.7.25p4/lib/libdb-4.7.so #5 0x000000000054da72 in hdb_cache_entry_db_relock (bdb=0xaec000, txn=0x1031c20, ei=0x3d5e240, rw=1, tryOnly=0, lock=0x444a7b30) at cache.c:198 #6 0x000000000054fe9e in hdb_cache_modify (bdb=0xaec000, e=0x7f5ccb945f58, newAttrs=0x7f5ccf4c1ec0, txn=0x1031c20, lock=0x444a7b30) at cache.c:1231 #7 0x00000000004fc2bd in hdb_modify (op=0x444a86d0, rs=0x444a8040) at modify.c:711 #8 0x00000000004db66f in overlay_op_walk (op=0x444a86d0, rs=0x444a8040, which=op_modify, oi=0xace000, on=0x0) at backover.c:671 #9 0x00000000004db899 in over_op_func (op=0x444a86d0, rs=0x444a8040, which=op_modify) at backover.c:723 #10 0x00000000004db9de in over_op_modify (op=0x444a86d0, rs=0x444a8040) at backover.c:762 #11 0x00000000004c8c59 in syncrepl_message_to_op (si=0xb22000, op=0x444a86d0, msg=0x7f5cf7df5f80) at syncrepl.c:2316 #12 0x00000000004c40dd in do_syncrep2 (op=0x444a86d0, si=0xb22000) at syncrepl.c:986 #13 0x00000000004c61a6 in do_syncrepl (ctx=0x444a8df0, arg=0xb768c0) at syncrepl.c:1522 #14 0x0000000000449003 in connection_read_thread (ctx=0x444a8df0, argv=0x31) at connection.c:1288 #15 0x0000000000591269 in ldap_int_thread_pool_wrapper (xpool=0xa741c0) at tpool.c:688 #16 0x00007f5e087ee3f7 in start_thread () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #17 0x00007f5e0794dbbd in clone () from /lib/libc.so.6 #18 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () ===== gdb (thread modifying cn=config): ===== Thread 3 (Thread 0x48cb2950 (LWP 29597)): #0 0x00007f5e087f2b99 in pthread_cond_wait@@GLIBC_2.3.2 () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #1 0x0000000000592806 in ldap_pvt_thread_cond_wait (cond=0xa74220, mutex=0xa741c8) at thr_posix.c:277 #2 0x000000000059162f in handle_pause (tpool=0x8b5420, pause_type=96) at tpool.c:788 #3 0x00000000005916fa in ldap_pvt_thread_pool_pause (tpool=0x8b5420) at tpool.c:831 #4 0x0000000000433ac4 in config_back_modify (op=0x7f5cdc507800, rs=0x48cb1c90) at bconfig.c:5837 #5 0x0000000000468e52 in fe_op_modify (op=0x7f5cdc507800, rs=0x48cb1c90) at modify.c:303 #6 0x0000000000468761 in do_modify (op=0x7f5cdc507800, rs=0x48cb1c90) at modify.c:177 #7 0x0000000000448a65 in connection_operation (ctx=0x48cb1df0, arg_v=0x7f5cdc507800) at connection.c:1150 #8 0x0000000000448fe7 in connection_read_thread (ctx=0x48cb1df0, argv=0x15) at connection.c:1286 #9 0x0000000000591269 in ldap_int_thread_pool_wrapper (xpool=0xa741c0) at tpool.c:688 #10 0x00007f5e087ee3f7 in start_thread () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #11 0x00007f5e0794dbbd in clone () from /lib/libc.so.6 #12 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () ===== I also have bt full output if needed. Since restarting I have seen no issues with any of the instances and the failed instance synced without issue. Let me know if I should create an ITS. Thanks, Dave

6 8

Internal telephone extension number
by Gavin Henry 10 Aug '12

10 Aug '12

Hi all, What attribute are you using to represent an internal telephone extension? Can't see any standards based ones. Thanks. -- Kind Regards, Gavin Henry. Managing Director. T +44 (0) 1224 279484 M +44 (0) 7930 323266 F +44 (0) 1224 824887 E ghenry(a)suretec.co.uk Open Source. Open Solutions(tm). http://www.suretecsystems.com/ Suretec Systems is a limited company registered in Scotland. Registered number: SC258005. Registered office: 24 Cormack Park, Rothienorman, Inverurie, Aberdeenshire, AB51 8GL. Subject to disclaimer at http://www.suretecgroup.com/disclaimer.html Do you know we have our own VoIP provider called SureVoIP? See http://www.surevoip.co.uk Did you see our API? http://www.surevoip.co.uk/api

4 4

import ldif does not work
by Karntol Dernsef 02 Aug '12

02 Aug '12

Hi list, I am fighting with openldap for some time now and I can't get it to work. I started clean. I've followed this tutorial, and everything works fine. I used followed the example and only changed dc=company,dc=com into dc=mycompany,dc=org. Then I want to import this file, because I am busy with a WebSphere book from Packtpub, and I need to follow along and setting up a LDAP server with these contents: -------------------------- dn: o=mycompany.org objectclass: top objectclass: organization o: mycompany.org dn: ou=users,o=mycompany.org objectclass:organizationalunit ou: users description: generic users branch dn: ou=groups,o=mycompany.org objectclass:organizationalunit ou: groups description: generic groups branch dn: ou=roles,o=mycompany.org objectclass:organizationalunit ou: roles description: generic roles branch dn: cn=wasadmin,ou=roles,o=mycompany.org cn: wasadmin uid: wasadmin objectclass: top objectclass: person objectclass: organizationalPerson objectclass: inetOrgPerson userpassword: wasadmin sn: wasadmin givenname: wasadmin title: wasadmin description: WAS Administrator dn: cn=ldapbind,ou=users,o=mycompany.org cn: ldapbind uid: ldapbind objectclass: top objectclass: person objectclass: organizationalPerson objectclass: inetOrgPerson userpassword: ldapbind sn: ldapbind givenname: ldapbind title: ldapbind description: ldapbind dn: cn=Bob Jackson,ou=users,o=mycompany.org cn: Bob Jackson uid: bjackson mail: bjackson(a)mycompany.org objectclass: top objectclass: person objectclass: organizationalPerson objectclass: inetOrgPerson userpassword: password sn: Jackson givenname: Bob telephonenumber: 123456789 title: WAS Administrator description: LDAP test user dn: cn=Mary Smith,ou=users,o=mycompany.org cn: Mary Smith uid: msmith mail: msmith(a)mycompany.org objectclass: top objectclass: person objectclass: organizationalPerson objectclass: inetOrgPerson userpassword: password sn: Smith givenname: Mary telephonenumber: 123456789 title: WAS Administrator description: LDAP test user dn: cn=wasadmins,ou=groups,o=mycompany.org objectclass: groupofnames cn: wasadmins description: WAS Admins # add the group members all of which are # assumed to exist under people member: cn=Bob Jackson,ou=users,o=mycompany.org member: cn=Mary Smith,ou=users,o=mycompany.org member: cn=wasadmin,ou=roles,o=mycompany.org But when I want to import, I get this: [root@CentOS-01 cn=config]# ldapadd -W -D cn=admin,dc=mycompany,dc=org -v -x -f /tmp/mycompanyorg.ldif ldap_initialize( <DEFAULT> ) Enter LDAP Password: add objectclass: top organization add o: mycompany.org adding new entry "o=mycompany.org" ldap_add: Server is unwilling to perform (53) additional info: no global superior knowledge When I do this: [root@CentOS-01 cn=config]# ldapsearch -xLLWD cn=admin,dc=mycompany,dc=org -b dc=mycompany,dc=org dn Enter LDAP Password: version: 1 No such object (32) Something tells me it's wrong. So, a friend who helped me said I had to create the company first, and that I should use dc=company,dc=org instead of o=company.org. I had to create the company first in the LDAP he said, so he passed me this file: # usergroups.ldif # # dn: dc=mycompany,dc=org dc: company objectClass: top objectClass: domain dn: ou=users,dc=mycompany,dc=org ou: Users objectClass: top objectClass: organizationalUnit description: Central location for UNIX users dn: ou=groups,dc=mycompany,dc=org ou: Groups objectClass: top objectClass: organizationalUnit description: Central location for UNIX groups # EOF But I can't add that: [root@CentOS-01 cn=config]# ldapadd -W -D cn=admin,dc=mycompany,dc=org -v -x -f /tmp/usergroup.ldif ldap_initialize( <DEFAULT> ) Enter LDAP Password: add dc: company add objectClass: top domain adding new entry "dc=mycompany,dc=org" ldap_add: Naming violation (64) additional info: value of single-valued naming attribute 'dc' conflicts with value present in entry I hope I will ever solve this, I can't complete my study now and have wasted hours and hours on this ldap problem. I hope you can help me out.. Karntol

2 2

Issue with dynlist overlay
by Patrick Hemmer 31 Jul '12

31 Jul '12

So I just ran across an undocumented issue with slapo-dynlist. I'm not sure if this is a bug, or just missing in the documentation. The issue is that if the entry being dynamically added to the parent entry has the objectClass slapo-dynlist is configured to use, that entry is not dynamically added to the parent. For example: ---- olcOverlay=dynlist,olcdatabase=hdb,cn=config objectClass: olcDynamicList objectClass: olcOverlayConfig olcDlAttrSet: groupOfURLs memberUrl ---- dn: cn=parent,dc=example,dc=com objectClass: groupOfNames objectClass: groupOfURLs member: uid=foo,dc=example,dc=com memberUrl: ldap:///cn=child,dc=example,dc=com dn: cn=child,dc=example,dc=com objectClass: groupOfNames objectClass: groupOfURLs member: uid=bar,dc=example,dc=com --- In the above example, I would "member: uid=bar,dc=example,dc=com" to be added to cn=parent,dc=example,dc=com, but it isn't. Now the documentation clearly states recursion is not allowed, so if cn=child were to have a 'memberUrl', this memberUrl would not be expanded. But this is not what is being done here, cn=child has no memberUrl present. It also behaves perfectly fine if I pull the "objetClass: groupOfURLs" off cn=child. So is this supposed to behave this way? If so can the documentation be updated to indicate this restriction? If not I'd be happy to open an ITS on the issue. -Patrick

2 5

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

openldap-technical July 2012