A bit of clarification ‘ldaps’ is running ldap over TLS on port 636 (similar to 
http port 80 and https port 443).

This is different from StartTLS which connects in plaintext on port 389 then 
sends a request to switch the existing connection to TLS.

Ldaps should be supported, StartTLS is not.

There’s also a bit of a third option. If you are using smbadm to join an 
illumos system to active directory and use idmap to map SIDs to UID/GIDs, it 
can also use SASL/GSSAPI (basically Kerberos).


From: Ian Kaufman <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, March 18, 2022 at 2:36 PM
To: omnios-discuss <[email protected]>
Cc: illumos-discuss <[email protected]>
Subject: [discuss] Re: [OmniOS-discuss] Active Directory LDAP client
I used to force port 636 comm with my OpenSolaris clients and had my LDAP 
slaves listen and handle both TLS and LDAPS

Ian

On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 8:38 AM Schweiss, Chip 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I'm trying to join my OmniOS 038 systems to our AD so that UIDs and GIDs 
resolve and I can get around the NFS 16 group limit.

The problem I'm having is that it appears the LDAP client in Illumos has no 
support for LDAPS which is now a requirement.

>From the ldapclient man page:

CAUTION
       Currently StartTLS is not supported by libldap.so.5, therefore the port
       number provided refers to the port used during a TLS open, rather than
       the port used as part of a StartTLS sequence. To avoid timeout delays,
       mixed use of TLS and non-TLS authentication mechanisms is not
       recommended.

       For example:

         -h foo:1000 -a authenticationMethod=tls:simple

       ...or:

         defaultServerList= foo:1000
         authenticationMethod= tls:simple

       The preceding refers to a raw TLS open on host foo port 1000, not an
       open, StartTLS sequence on an unsecured port 1000. If port 1000 is
       unsecured the connection will not be made.

       As a second example, the following will incur a significant timeout
       delay while attempting the connection to foo:636 with an unsecured
       bind.

         defaultServerList= foo:636 foo:389
         authenticationMethod= simple

Has anyone found a way to work around this?

Thanks,
-Chip


--
Ian Kaufman
Research Systems Administrator
UC San Diego, Jacobs School of Engineering ikaufman AT ucsd DOT edu

UC San Diego is working thoughtfully and strategically to consider our return 
to campus, with safety as the top priority.  Stay informed about UC San Diego 
developments and updates in response to COVID-19 at 
https://returntolearn.ucsd.edu<https://returntolearn.ucsd.edu/>
illumos<https://illumos.topicbox.com/latest> / illumos-discuss / see 
discussions<https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss> + 
participants<https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/members> + delivery 
options<https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription> 
Permalink<https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/Tb99e88b61c690e04-Mc29e95b606d83d72ad2dbf6f>

------------------------------------------
illumos: illumos-discuss
Permalink: 
https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/Tb99e88b61c690e04-M87f7c2872aa39b632bbb5b61
Delivery options: https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription

Reply via email to