On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Kenneth Rogers wrote:
The man page for ldap_search_ext doesn't specify how the timeout value
is used. There are external sources that say it defines a timeout
both for the client and the server. Is that accurate?
No. ldap_search_ext() only sends a query without waiting f
Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
You fail to mention what version of OpenLDAP you are running, which would
be useful information. But I would not that if you have a poorly designed
DIT, this may be the expected behavior as the query will look at every
entry in the scope.
It will look at every *alias
--On Monday, January 28, 2008 10:04 AM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But I would not that if you have a poorly
s/not/note/
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Engineer
Zimbra, Inc
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and
--On Friday, January 25, 2008 9:51 AM + Dave Lewney
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jan 25 09:30:25 murray slapd[278]: conn=0 op=1 SRCH
base="ou=test,ou=services,o=university of sussex" scope=2 deref=1
filter="(uid=dml)"\n
Jan 25 09:30:25 murray slapd[278]: bdb_idl_fetch_key: [01872a84]\n
Jan 25
Hello,
The man page for ldap_search_ext doesn't specify how the timeout value
is used. There are external sources that say it defines a timeout
both for the client and the server. Is that accurate?
KR
--
""If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?"
--Albert Ein
On Monday 28 January 2008 18:21:48 Buchan Milne wrote:
> On Monday 28 January 2008 16:44:34 Adam Williams wrote:
> > thanks, when I changed
> >
> > access to *
> >by * read
> >
> > to
> >
> > access to *
> >by self read
> >
> > and restart slapd, i can't log in properly. the settin
On Monday 28 January 2008 16:44:34 Adam Williams wrote:
> thanks, when I changed
>
> access to *
>by * read
>
> to
>
> access to *
>by self read
>
> and restart slapd, i can't log in properly. the setting is too
> restrictive.
No, it is not. Did you read my reply on the nss_ldap l
what user do you use with pam_ldap / nss_ldap / samba to access to the
directory ? My ACLs are a quite complicated because I have also postfix,
apache, egroupware who access to the different entries / attribute, but
I have a different user for each service, and set the ACLs depending of
this us
Denis Sacchet wrote:
As you put "by * read" anyone can read the three specified attribute,
delete this line, and anonymous use will be able to authenticate, the
node will be able to modified itself, and all other kind of users will
have a denied access
access to *
by * read
With th
I'm trying to figure out what my ACL should be in slapd.conf. What I
want is that a user can change his/her password, but they won't be able
to read any other user's password. Right now what I have is not
restrictive enough. I've read the OpenLDAP admin guide on ACLs but it
was not clear to
On Seg, 2008-01-28 at 09:12 -0500, Aaron Richton wrote:
> My syncrepl provider seems to be missing updates following an upgrade to
> 2.3.40. While I was trying to push them through this morning, I got an odd
> message:
>
> Jan 28 08:46:19 slapd[12685]: [ID 588225 local4.debug] conn=234174 op=2
I'm trying to figure out what my ACL should be in slapd.conf. What I
want is that a user can change his/her password, but they won't be able
to read any other user's password. Right now what I have is not
restrictive enough. I've read the OpenLDAP admin guide on ACLs but it
was not clear to
My syncrepl provider seems to be missing updates following an upgrade to
2.3.40. While I was trying to push them through this morning, I got an odd
message:
Jan 28 08:46:19 slapd[12685]: [ID 588225 local4.debug] conn=234174 op=2
RESULT tag=107 err=80 text=DN index delete failed
Is there any
On Monday 21 January 2008 16:49:39 Diaa Radwan wrote:
> We have two openldap 2.4.7 , configured as MirrorMode, We are planning
> to add load balancer in front of both servers into the production
> environment, We don't want too go through conflicts issues as it was
> stated before as messy process.
14 matches
Mail list logo
