Kenneth Holter wrote:
Hi.
We're using Windows sync on our (RedHat) directory server to fetch
users from AD, and have a quick question about the UID attribute: It
look to me like the UID attribute that linux ldap clients use for
authentication, is a attribute created when one adds the
Ajeet S Raina wrote:
Guys,
I have set up 389 server setup with dc=im,dc=logic,dc=com domain
component.I have been assigned work for setting up structure in the
following ways:
There are two Location : Noida and Hyderabad ( we need to make it
OU.Is it possible?)
Why do you need to make it
Ajeet S Raina wrote:
Hello All,
I attempted writing Low Level Design for my 389 Server setup:
1389 Design and architecture
2Installing CentOS Machine
3Installing 389 Directory Server
4Setting up 389 SSL Configuration
5User Group creation and Restriction on
Steffen Blume wrote:
Hello,
my admin server (apache/httpd.worker) is not starting under
/OpenSolaris/ (/SunOS 5.11/).
I added the error log below. Log level is debug. The only error msg is
the last line from nss. I compiled 389 DS by myself.
Versions:
nss-3.12.4-with-nspr-4.8
389-ds-base-1.2.4
Ajeet S Raina wrote:
Let me explain you what is the requirement.
1.All we have different projects in Noida and Hyderabad.
Those Projects are running on Linux Machines.We are setting up the 389
Server so that these Project Machine Client can authenticate through
389 Server credentials (Just
Ajeet S Raina wrote:
I have installed 389 Package through:
#yum install 389-ds
But no idea how to proceed further.
How can I start the directory server?
http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Install_Guide
--
389
testing the rest of it...
Thanks. I've corrected the Install_Guide and Download pages.
-- juniper
- Original Message -
From: Rich Megginson rmegg...@redhat.com
To: 389-annou...@redhat.com, 389-us...@redhat.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2010 6:26:42 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Anne Cross wrote:
Our AD admins want to move users from our ou=Users tree to a new tree called
ou=Departed, after we've locked the accounts, so that we know when a user has
left the company and we've completed the cleanup process. We've discovered
through trial and error that when they do
Orion Poplawski wrote:
I'm trying to upgrade from fedora-ds-base-1.1.2 and admin-1.1.6 to
389-ds-base-1.2.4 and admin-1.1.9. Running setup-ds-admin.pl -u I get:
Are you ready to set up your servers? [yes]:
dn: cn=SMD5,cn=Password Storage Schemes,cn=plugins,cn=config
objectclass: top
Orion Poplawski wrote:
On 01/05/2010 02:23 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
Error adding entry 'cn=SMD5,cn=Password Storage
Schemes,cn=plugins,cn=config'. Error: Object class violation
Cause appears to be:
[05/Jan/2010:14:11:10 -0700] - Entry cn=SMD5,cn=Password Storage
muzzol wrote:
hi,
i've created a cert request with -8 parameter (subjectAltName),
signed with my own openssl CA and installed on a 389 node.
when i perform an ldapsearch with TLS (-ZZ) i get
Did you specify the FQDN with the -h argument? What hostname did you
give? The real hostname or
Scott Kaminski wrote:
From what i've seen FreeIPA has a major drawback at present, it
doesn't work on EL without hacking.
Check with the IPA guys about this.
Also from what I've seen it requires Fedora 10, which as I understand
is moving into unsupported status already.
No, it should not
Chun Tat David Chu wrote:
Hi All,
I really like the original layout of the Fedora Directory Server where
all files are installed in /opt/fedora-ds
Is there a way to change/configure 389 Directory so all files are
installed in /opt/389-ds or something equivalent?
We only provide pre-built
Prashanth Sundaram wrote:
Hi Rich,
I am getting this error when I install 389-adminutil. Any idea which
package gives these dependencies?
What is your platform? RHEL 5? CentOS 5? Something else? What version?
32-bit or 64-bit?
[r...@ldap02 psundaram]# yum install 389-adminutilLoaded
Prashanth Sundaram wrote:
Hi All,
Which one of the case below is suitable for a Multi-Master
replication. I have a load balancer with/ ldap.domain.com,/ which is
what clients will use to authenticate.
*_Question:
_*Which one is a better implementation? What are the trade-offs?
Please input
Prashanth Sundaram wrote:
Rich,
I specify the individual host’s FQDN in the replication agreement.
So, ldap01.domain.com ?
Maybe openldap/openssl has a problem with subjectAltName? Try mozldap
ldapsearch instead like this:
/usr/lib/mozldap/ldapsearch -h FQDN -ZZZ -P
Prashanth Sundaram wrote:
Rich,
Centos 5.4(Final) 64-bit 2.6.18-164.9.1.el5
Repos
Rpmforge, EPEL,EPEL-Testing, pgdg-84 CentOS-Base CentOS-Media
Hmm - is the mozldap package available from CentOS?
Hi Rich,
I am getting this error when I install 389-adminutil. Any idea
which
Ajeet S Raina wrote:
Hello Kenneho,
Thanks for the wonderful explanation. It did helped me to come up with
something more informative.
I was going through Windows Sync and want to know about these points:
1.What all changes has to be done on Active Directory Server? Just to
check risk and
Prashanth Sundaram wrote:
Mozldap pkgs are available and installed.
mozldap-tools-6.0.5-1.el5
mozldap-6.0.5-1.el5
rpm -ql mozldap
Prashanth Sundaram wrote:
Rich,
Centos 5.4(Final) 64-bit 2.6.18-164.9.1.el5
Repos
Rpmforge, EPEL,EPEL-Testing, pgdg-84 CentOS-Base
Prashanth Sundaram wrote:
Here it is
/usr/lib64/libldap60.so
/usr/lib64/libldif60.so
/usr/lib64/libprldap60.so
/usr/lib64/libssldap60.so
/usr/share/doc/mozldap-6.0.5
/usr/share/doc/mozldap-6.0.5/README.rpm
Then why can't 389-adminutil find these? Is this some sort of 32-bit
vs. 64-bit problem?
Crud - a new package will be out shortly
-- juniper
- Original Message -
From: Rich Megginson rmegg...@redhat.com
To: 389-annou...@redhat.com, 389-us...@redhat.com
Sent: Monday, December 7, 2009 6:57:20 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [389-users] Announcing 389 Directory Server
The 389 team is pleased to announce the availability of Release
Candidate 3 of version 1.2.5.
NOTE: Packages for Enterprise Linux are available from EPEL. We will no
longer have a separate yum repo for these packagse.
We need your help! Please help us test this software. It is a Release
Jason Solan wrote:
Hello,
Recently we've upgraded our fds servers (1.1.3) to 389 (1.2.2). Doing
so seems to have broken password sync from 389 to Active Directory. All
other attributes are passing fine and passync from AD to 389 is working.
The AD machine has not been updated since before
Mitja Mihelič wrote:
On 12/12/2009 12:06 AM, Rich Megginson wrote:
Mitja Mihelič wrote:
On 12/07/2009 05:18 PM, Rich Megginson wrote:
Mitja Mihelic wrote:
Hi!
We have two instances of the DS in a multimaster replication setup.
We had to restore the database of one of the servers from
Dimon wrote:
Hi everyone! I'm a beginer in Fedora Directory (389 project) server so I hope
that you will give me an advice to solve my problem.
I want to synchronize my diectory server with Active Directory's users (centos-ds-8.1.0). I read the manual Red Hat 8.1 and had success. But my AD
Juan Asensio Sánchez wrote:
Hi Andrey
Thak you very much. The memberOf plugin is working fine in a test
server. Have you any experience with read only databases (configured
as referral on update)?
Also, we have defined many replication agreements that are already
working. Thay are
Dimon wrote:
--
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:45:11 -0700
From: Rich Megginson rmegg...@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [389-users] I need some help!
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
Message-ID
Andrey Ivanov wrote:
Is there a reason why 389 was absent at the LDAPCon 2009 conference?
The short answer is - budget.
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@redhat.com
Kenneth Holter wrote:
Hi.
We're setting up Red Hat Directory Server v8.1.0, and are able to
access the Directory Server console by issuing the redhat-idm-console
script. I can access the administration module by pointing my web
browser to port 9830 on the LDAP server. But is there a way
port389.org will be down for maintenance tomorrow (Saturday December 12,
2009) beginning at around 7:30am EST (US), and coming back online a few
hours after that (if all goes well).
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
Note - changed the subject line for follow ups - I don't think the
problem is a corrupted database - it's just that replication stops
working for some reason.
john.bry...@oit.gatech.edu wrote:
We are still having this issue, every so often. Sometimes a 389
database becomes unresponsive to
Mitja Mihelič wrote:
On 12/07/2009 05:18 PM, Rich Megginson wrote:
Mitja Mihelic wrote:
Hi!
We have two instances of the DS in a multimaster replication setup.
We had to restore the database of one of the servers from backup.
While the second master was down, the first was receiving updates
Ivan Ferreira wrote:
Hi all.
I'm using Fedora Directory Server 1.0.4 in a multi-master configuration since a
few years by now.
The first instance was created on server1.
The second instance was createad on server2 and registered with the
administration server on server1.
The userRoot and
Prashanth Sundaram wrote:
Hi Rich,
I destroyed by testbox x64 running 389-ds-base 1.2.2 and did a fresh
install which pulled new 389-ds-base RC-2.
How? What command did you give to install 389-ds-base? Note that
389-ds-base-1.2.3 and later are not compatible with 389-admin-1.1.8 - if
you
Prashanth Sundaram wrote:
Rich,
I installed from dirsrv and dirsrv-noarch repos. Is there a reason why
RC is released in dirsrv and dirsrv-noarch repos? I was not planning
on using testing repo as yet.
Arg - I did not mean for them to go to dirsrv, only dirsrv-testing - I
will fix this
Marco Strullato wrote:
Hi all,
I'm installing the directory server on a fresh centos 5.3 32 bit
following this guide:
http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Download#Enterprise_Linux_5
While executing yum install 389-ds I get the following problem: what's
wrong? it seems that the required
389-ds-base 1.2.5.rc2 was accidentally released to FC6/EL5 stable
instead of testing. This only affected the FC6/EL5 packages. The
Fedora packages are in the correct testing repos.
This problem has now been fixed - 1.2.5.rc2 is available from the
testing repo - the latest stable version of
Andrey Ivanov wrote:
Hi,
2009/12/8 Rich Megginson rmegg...@redhat.com:
The 389 team is pleased to announce the availability of Release
Candidate 2 of version 1.2.5.
* [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486171 486171] [RFE]
Access log - Failed binds
What does
Andrey Ivanov wrote:
Hi,
2009/12/8 Rich Megginson rmegg...@redhat.com:
The 389 team is pleased to announce the availability of Release
Candidate 2 of version 1.2.5.
Well, this time the installation (compiled from sources) was ok. I've
also imported my ldif export from
Alan McKay wrote:
Hey folks,
Now that I want to install this in production, I have to ask about dsktune :-)
Some of what it is telling me just seems plain incorrect. Let's have a look
WARNING: There are only 1024 file descriptors (hard limit) available, which
limit the number of
Alan McKay wrote:
Aha!
[r...@fileserver ~]# ulimit -n
1024
So there is still no real description on why this matters. It is just
mentioned in passing here :
Mitja Mihelic wrote:
Hi!
We have two instances of the DS in a multimaster replication setup.
We had to restore the database of one of the servers from backup.
While the second master was down, the first was receiving updates.
After we fired up the restored master it started receiving updates as
Andrey Ivanov wrote:
2009/12/2 Rich Megginson rmegg...@redhat.com:
The 389 team is pleased to announce the availability of Release Candidate 1
of version 1.2.5.
We need your help! Please help us test this software. It is a Release
Candidate, so it is fairly stable at this point. We have
Allan Gaston Hougham wrote:
Hi Rich,
thanks for you support, I will try it
Do you have any white papper or guide for implementing LDAP server and
client to use TLS?
directory server - http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Howto:SSL
I read the Administration Guide but if you have any
The 389 team is pleased to announce the availability of Release
Candidate 2 of version 1.2.5.
We need your help! Please help us test this software. It is a Release
Candidate, so it is fairly stable at this point. We have worked hard to
make sure upgrades from previous releases are as smooth
Alan McKay wrote:
So - failed with error 3 this time but I'm not losing hope. By that
point I think both servers were a little bastardized from trying this
method and that.
When you say failed with error 3 you should be more specific - what
failed? What is the context? Is there any
Alan McKay wrote:
Hey folks,
I keep seeing reference to 4 servers in all the docs. Is that a
magic # of some sort? i.e. Do I need to have 4? Or can I have 2 or
3?
With 389 there is no limitation - you can have as many or as few as you
want. The limitation of 4 only applies to Red Hat
Alan McKay wrote:
When you say failed with error 3 you should be more specific - what
failed? What is the context? Is there any additional information in the
error message?
Yeah, sorry, I wasn't more specific because I wasn't really asking for
help - just giving an update :-)
Sure.
Alan McKay wrote:
That usually means you haven't specified the supplier DN in the consumer
replica, or you have specified a different supplier DN on the supplier side
than the supplier DN you specified on the consumer side.
You mean the replication manager that I set up like this :
# cd
Allan Gaston Hougham wrote:
Any sugesst??
Did you not read my reply? See below
Thanks!
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 11:43:34 -0700
From: rmegg...@redhat.com
To: fedora-directory-users@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [389-users] Password Policy not working fine
Allan Gaston Hougham wrote:
I
Edward Koko Konetzko wrote:
Rich Megginson wrote:
Edward Koko Konetzko wrote:
I have a set of CoS objects I am importing in and their add times
are extremely slow about 1 a second.
What platform? What 389-ds-base version? By import do you mean
ldif2db or ldap add?
RHEL 5 64 bit, RHDS 8.1
Alan McKay wrote:
Hmmm, it seems that Centos-DS does not have this :
http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/WebApps_Install
Right. You have to install fedora-ds-dsgw. You should be able to use
fedora-ds-dsgw with centos-ds-base and centos-ds-admin.
# Install the Directory Server
Allan Gaston Hougham wrote:
Hi, thanks for you response,
We have Fedora-ds 1.2.2 2009.237.2054
Platform:
Linux zblhp36 2.6.18-8.1.14.el5 #1 SMP Tue Sep 25 11:45:55 EDT 2007
x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
In this time we can apply any policies, but is not working user must
change
Allan Gaston Hougham wrote:
I can´t .. We have two errors:
[r...@dblvm32 ~]# passwd testsi
Changing password for user testsi.
Enter login(LDAP) password:
New UNIX password:
Retype new UNIX password:
LDAP password information update failed: Confidentiality required
Operation requires a secure
Alan McKay wrote:
... I'm going to ask anyway.
I've got an internal wiki page in my company right now with details on
how I've set up our new Centos-DS server. There is nothing like this
currently on your wiki - short and sweet explanation that will
probably work for 90%+ of small
Alan McKay wrote:
Hey folks,
The HOWTO refers to a script that is at the end of a dead link
http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Howto:MultiMasterReplication
And the Red Hat docs tell me to do something that causes an error.
Alan McKay wrote:
Oh, and another question.
The first server seems to be working fine. When installing the 2nd
one I came to this question and did not really know what it meant so I
said yes and pointed it at the 1st server. Was this the right thing
to do?
Do you want to register this
Alan McKay wrote:
Hey folks,
I finally have this thing running - and I love it so far! I have
basic Linux login working, as well as Apache auth. Those are my 2
primary concerns so I think I'm ready to start to roll this bad boy
out.
And one password to unite them all!!! Bwa, ha, ha, ha!
The 389 team is pleased to announce the availability of Release
Candidate 1 of version 1.2.5.
We need your help! Please help us test this software. It is a Release
Candidate, so it is fairly stable at this point. We have worked hard to
make sure upgrades from previous releases are as
Edward Koko Konetzko wrote:
I have a set of CoS objects I am importing in and their add times are
extremely slow about 1 a second.
What platform? What 389-ds-base version? By import do you mean ldif2db
or ldap add?
There are about 500k objects in the directory currently and its broken
down
Majian wrote:
Thanks ~
But after I installed the perl-Mozilla-LDAP package ,the screen said
the package has been installed .
2009/12/1 Juan Asensio Sánchez oke...@gmail.com
mailto:oke...@gmail.com
yum install perl-Mozilla-LDAP
2009/12/1 Majian jian...@gmail.com
, use -R.
what does rpm -ql perl-Mozilla-LDAP say?
In the meantime, you might try setting PERL5LIB - see man perlrun -
look for PERL5LIB
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Rich Megginson rmegg...@redhat.com
mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com wrote:
Majian wrote:
Thanks ~
But after I
Tim Hartmann wrote:
Rich Megginson wrote:
You want to use the pam passthrough plugin from 389 1.2.2 Fedora 11
with 1.1.3? There are binaries for EL5.
Could you point me in the right direction to get the binaries? I
asked for guidance through our support channel
Derek Alexander wrote:
Hi,
Does Fedora Directory have an equivalent of Active Directory's 'whenCreated'
attribute?
If not, do you know of any standard schema that contain such an attribute?
Yes. createTimestamp and creatorsName tell you when the entry was
created and by whom. There are
Allan Gaston Hougham wrote:
Dears,
I have a problem with my passwords policies, I enabled Enable
fine-grained password policy, I apply this but is not working fine.
I followed the steps of Administration Guide pag 364 -
*7.1.1.2. Configuring a Subtree/User Password Policy Using the
Daniel wrote:
And what kind of action do you recommend?
Let's first identify what version of fedora-ds - rpm -qi fedora-ds-base
Rich Megginson wrote:
Daniel wrote:
Hi Rich,
very good point, I just discovered a very important difference.
ldap1 - rpm -qi 389-ds-base gives
Alan McKay wrote:
Hey folks,
I'm making my first foray into DS on Centos 5.4. I got thinks
installed a couple of weeks ago but now want to start from scratch
again. It is a sandbox system running in a VM, so I can fairly easily
just reload Centos in there.However, it would be even
Mitja Mihelic wrote:
Hi!
Is it possible to use references for attributeTypes/objectClasses
definitions in the 389DS schemas ?
Like: schacAttributeType:1 instead of 1.3.6.1.4.1.25178.1.2.1
Of course the OID for schacAttributeType should be defined beforehand.
No, that is not supported in 389.
Daniel wrote:
Hi, I need a helping hand from some experienced 389-ds admin.
I have built two LDAPs based on CentOS 5.3 and Fedora directory server.
ldap1 - is the production server which is running a few months. all of
the data are placed there.
What version? rpm -qi 389-ds-base (or
Tim Hartmann wrote:
Hi Folks,
I've been looking at upgrading the version of libpam-passthru-plugin.so
that we use, we are using v 1.1.3 from an older version of Fedora
Directory Server on our RHDS 8.0 Install, I noticed that v 1.2.2 is
available in 389 on Fedora 11, and thought it might be
Tim Hartmann wrote:
Rich Megginson wrote:
Tim Hartmann wrote:
Hi Folks,
I've been looking at upgrading the version of libpam-passthru-plugin.so
that we use, we are using v 1.1.3 from an older version of Fedora
Directory Server on our RHDS 8.0 Install, I noticed that v 1.2.2 is
available
application used for server and user/group administration.
Do you think this could be the part of the reason?
I think the problem is schema/syntax incompatibility between fedora ds
and the latest 389 ds. I'd like to try to narrow down exactly what
schema/syntax is causing the problem.
Rich Megginson
Bucl, Casper wrote:
Hi,
I’m trying to create a high availability ldap for a system I have in
place that is currently using multimaster replication. Using a shared
storage system isn’t an option in this case.
To give you an idea of what our setup looks like,
There are two nodes, that have
Bucl, Casper wrote:
-Original Message-
From: fedora-directory-users-boun...@redhat.com
[mailto:fedora-directory-users-boun...@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:23 AM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re
Bucl, Casper wrote:
-Original Message-
From: fedora-directory-users-boun...@redhat.com
[mailto:fedora-directory-users-boun...@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 12:35 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re
We are trying to get some feedback about the packages in testing before
we push them out to stable. The packages currently in testing are:
389-ds-base 1.2.4
389-admin 1.1.9
Windows PassSync 1.1.3
We would really like to know if you are using these and, if so, if they
are working for you (or
repo.
Rich Megginson wrote:
I have a new PassSync package 1.1.3 that should address some install
issues reported by some users on Windows 2008.
Please test these and let me know how they work
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/389-PassSync-1.1.3-i386.msi
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/389
Robert Viduya wrote:
I didn't get a response to my previous request for help and our
situation degenerated (we lost 3 of our 4 masters) to the point where
I felt we had to do a clean rebuild. We did that late last week into
the weekend and had set up a 2 masters and assorted hubs and slaves.
Robert Viduya wrote:
On Nov 10, 2009, at 3:25 PM, Rich Megginson wrote:
No. Check the access log to see what operations were submitted to
the directory server at or around [10/Nov/2009:08:56:27 -0500]
Are your servers in time sync? Is cn=people rewbell gertrude the
agreement that sends
I have a new PassSync package 1.1.3 that should address some install
issues reported by some users on Windows 2008.
Please test these and let me know how they work
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/389-PassSync-1.1.3-i386.msi
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/389-PassSync-1.1.3-x86_64.msi
Terry Soucy wrote:
Hi Folks,
I have a weird issue that I can't find much information about.
We have a single-master replication setup, with the supplier
replicating to two consumers. The software is the same on all three
systems (fedora-ds-1.1.3-1) installed from packages. These are all
Robert Viduya wrote:
I didn't get a response to my previous request for help and our
situation degenerated (we lost 3 of our 4 masters) to the point where
I felt we had to do a clean rebuild. We did that late last week into
the weekend and had set up a 2 masters and assorted hubs and slaves.
jean-Noël Chardron wrote:
Rich Megginson wrote:
James Roman wrote:
Very first impression during installation. There is a weird chicken
and egg problem. Installation fails because it can not start the
passsync service. Service start-up fails because it can not
establish an SSL connection. NSS
Server 2008 64-bit - the passsync service failed to start, but
installation completed.
Has anyone else had this experience with the 1.1.2 packages?
Rich Megginson wrote:
James Roman wrote:
Very first impression during installation. There is a weird chicken
and egg problem. Installation fails
Anne Cross wrote:
Rich Megginson wrote:
Anne Cross wrote:
I'm trying to sync passwords from 389 to Active Directory.
If we import users from AD, then try to change their passwords, the
replication locks up.
Can you be more specific? Have you tried the replication log level
(which also logs
James Roman wrote:
I am unable to download the 1.2.1 versions of the passsync msi files.
I could really use the x86_64 version.
Sorry about that. The links have been updated.
Feedback is welcome.
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@redhat.com
Jens Ådne Rydland wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 07:22:53AM -0700, Rich Megginson wrote:
Jens Ådne Rydland wrote:
Right. And when I try to run setup-ds-admin.pl -u I'm asked about misc.
information that I don't have readily available, but most of it is
auto-filled in, and I guess
Juan Asensio Sánchez wrote:
Hi
I am already having poor performance when running this query. Any more
ideas to try? Could be related due to the data is across almost 30
different databases?
Could be. What do you mean by 30 different databases? Chaining?
Sub-suffixes? Can you provide
The 389 team is pleased to announce that the 389 Directory Server
version 1.2.4 is available for testing. The packages are available from
the testing repositories, not the official release repositories yet. We
are seeking feedback. There is one new package available for testing:
*
Luke Schierer wrote:
James Roman wrote:
I am unable to download the 1.2.1 versions of the passsync msi files.
I could really use the x86_64 version.
Sorry about that. The links have been updated.
Feedback is welcome.
Could we also please have a 1.2.x version of the console
Mitja Mihelič wrote:
Hi!
Note: real information (IPs, DNs, FQDNs) has been replaced with
generic information.
I have set up a single-master replication scenario.
supplier: ldap://supplier.example.com:389
consumer: ldap://consumer.example.com:389
Replications works with no problems.
I have
Juan Asensio Sánchez wrote:
Hi, thanks for your answer.
2009/10/27 Andrey Ivanov andrey.iva...@polytechnique.fr:
Hi,
Do you make the ldapsearch on the same server where ldap server turns?
Yes, sure.
I think your server does not freeze. When you receive the result search
Juan Asensio Sánchez wrote:
Hi
Samba is making a query to our 389 DS (v. 1.2.2, and too older
versions) that makes the servers freeze. The server is running, and
accepting connections, although the next queries are not processed
until the Samba query is returned. This Samba query takes a long
Morenisco wrote:
Hi,
I was able to install project-389 on CentOS 5.4, and It was so easy!
Good job!
Well, something has changed from Fedora Directory Server, and now I
don't know where are the scripts to start the directory server
service dirsrv start [instance name]
instance name is
Anne Cross wrote:
I'm trying to sync passwords from 389 to Active Directory.
If we import users from AD, then try to change their passwords, the
replication locks up.
Can you be more specific? Have you tried the replication log level
(which also logs winsync data) -
Brodie, Kent wrote:
Hi everyone.
We're using FDS (389) 1.2.0.
A few days ago, this started showing up in the logs on one of our two
multi-master-replicated nodes:
[17/Oct/2009:10:46:13 -0500] NSMMReplicationPlugin -
agmt=cn=Replication to winters.hmgc.mcw.edu (winters:389): Consumer
Randall Wood wrote:
Further information:
For the user that was uneditable: When first the password retry count is
set to zero, we get the error when saving, but, if we reset the password
retry count to zero and then change the uid by deleting the last
character and retyping it, we can save the
Brodie, Kent wrote:
Rich: Thanks for the debugging help!I'm still stuck, as I am not
sure exactly what I am looking at in terms of messages. I can see that
the same uniqueid 4922d291-be7a11de-adce9eef-94681f9f keeps failing, but
the message surrounding that error are anything but clear to
Brodie, Kent wrote:
OK. Further research-- it appears I have an issue with
passwordretrycount not replicating-- which apparently (did some
searches..) is a problem others have had, when the directory services is
set up in a replicating fashion (multi-master in my case). Has to do
with
Brodie, Kent wrote:
Um, rats. OK, I had deleted the offending ldap attribute, but the
replication engine is still trying to process/perform the failed
replication thing that I need to remove.How do I 'kill' a particular
replication entry?
Try what I sent in my other email.
--
389
1 - 100 of 966 matches
Mail list logo
