> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> [email protected]
>  
> [mailto:[email protected]
> illa.org] On Behalf Of Xu, Qiang (FXSGSC)
> Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 10:29 AM
> To: Rich Megginson; Markus Moeller
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: SASL authentication
> 
> Still, I have seen some strange packets in MozLDAP traffic: 
> ========================================
> 32    17.839052       13.198.98.107   13.198.98.35    LDAP    
> bindRequest(1) "<ROOT>" sasl 
> 33    17.917608       13.198.98.35    13.198.98.107   LDAP    
> bindResponse(1) saslBindInProgress 
> 35    17.919333       13.198.98.107   13.198.98.35    LDAP    
> bindRequest(2) "<ROOT>" [Malformed Packet]
> 36    17.919637       13.198.98.35    13.198.98.107   LDAP    
> bindResponse(2) saslBindInProgress 
> 37    17.920316       13.198.98.107   13.198.98.35    LDAP    
> bindRequest(3) "<ROOT>" sasl 
> 38    17.920691       13.198.98.35    13.198.98.107   LDAP    
> bindResponse(3) success 
> ========================================
> I am not sure if packet 35 is normal or not? After all, it 
> says the packet is malformed.
> 
> In contrast, a trace captured with OpenLDAP ldapsearch 
> utility does not have this malformat packet: 
> ========================================
> 22    24.805633       13.198.98.35    13.198.98.190   LDAP    
> bindResponse(1) saslBindInProgress 
> 28    26.616093       13.198.98.190   13.198.98.35    LDAP    
> bindRequest(2) "<ROOT>" sasl 
> 29    26.616459       13.198.98.35    13.198.98.190   LDAP    
> bindResponse(2) saslBindInProgress 
> 31    26.616705       13.198.98.190   13.198.98.35    LDAP    
> bindRequest(3) "<ROOT>" sasl 
> 32    26.633134       13.198.98.35    13.198.98.190   LDAP    
> bindResponse(3) success 
> ========================================
> Packet 28 is normal, compared to Packet 35 in the last trace.
> 
> Will this Malformed Packet bring any side effect? Have you 
> guys ever see this kind of packet in your own MozLDAP network trace?

Just to let you know that this Malformed Packet is observed with WireShark 
1.0.6, while the trace was captured with Ethereal 0.99.0. And through 
examination of both MozLDAP trace and OpenLDAP trace, packet 35 in MozLDAP 
trace is no different from packet 28 in OpenLDAP trace. Among the three binding 
requests in both traces, the first and the third ones are with Kerberos blob 
information, while the second (packet 35 in MozLDAP trace and Packet 28 in 
OpenLDAP trace) ones only indicate sasl mechanism in use is GSSAPI. 

But I still don't know why they look different in WireShark. Any suggestions?

Thanks,
Xu Qiang
_______________________________________________
dev-tech-ldap mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-ldap

Reply via email to