We're pulling our hair out over this issue and wondering if it rings a bell for 
anyone or perhaps there's a bug fix in a  later version of 389 that might 
resolve it.  I've looked and not found anything but it's also not the easiest 
issue to search for.  We are on CentOS DS now but can move to 389 of course but 
hesitate to put forth the effort if we aren't reasonably sure it will resolve 
our issue.

Certain bind DNs (so far only service accounts) are unable to search for users. 
 For instance:

[20/Feb/2014:10:18:05 -0500] conn=15600927 op=1 BIND 
dn="uid=copier,ou=employees,dc=domain,dc=org" method=128 version=3
[20/Feb/2014:10:18:05 -0500] conn=15600927 op=1 RESULT err=0 tag=97 nentries=0 
etime=0 dn="uid=copier,ou=employees,dc=domain,dc=org"
[20/Feb/2014:10:18:05 -0500] conn=15600927 op=2 SRCH 
base="ou=employees,dc=domain,dc=org" scope=2 filter="(uid=user1)" attrs="cn 
mail uid"
[20/Feb/2014:10:18:05 -0500] conn=15600927 op=2 RESULT err=0 tag=101 nentries=0 
etime=0

I did a search of the directory at the same time on the same replica as myself 
and other users with the same access level and was able to search uid=user1.

It sometimes only lasts a few minutes though in a few instances it was much 
longer.  In one case we resolved it by adding a service account with a 
different name but the same access level and moved the application to that 
account.  In another case where hundreds of copiers are configured with the 
binddn and thus changing the binddn wasn't practical we were able to resolve it 
by restoring the masters from a db2ldif and re-initializing the consumers. It's 
not isolated to once consumer--we've seen it on at least 2: one partial, one 
full.

Our environment is CentOS DS on CentOS 5.  We have ~35,000 entries in the 
directory, most of them users.  We only have 9 acis, most of which provide 
access via groups.  We have 2 multi-masters, 2 full consumers and until 
recently 2 partial replicas.  We converted the partial replicas to full 
replicas recently as we know there are/were issues with partial replication and 
wanted to rule that out.  We're at the latest version of CentOS DS:

[morgan@ldap01 ~]$ rpm -qa|grep centos-ds
centos-ds-admin-8.2.1-1.el5.centos
centos-ds-console-8.2.0-4.el5.centos
centos-ds-base-8.2.8-2.el5.centos
centos-ds-8.2.0-2.el5.centos
[morgan@ldap01 ~]$

This issue is killing us as it effectively denies access to a service for all 
users that use it.  This could be the VPN for instance which many users depend 
on all day for their work.

We are considering many options, primarily just moving to 389 on CentOS 6.  
That's a fairly big task for a site of our size so we'd like some confidence 
that we won't see a repeat of this issue.  There's talk of considering other 
products which no one wants to do but we're all edgy as this has caused a fair 
amount of downtime and about all I can do at the moment is monitor for it and 
re-initialize when it happens which doesn't inspire confidence.

thank you,

-morgan
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

Reply via email to