On 4/25/2017 11:04 PM, TomK wrote:
On 4/25/2017 4:42 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (25/04/17 16:35), Tom wrote:
We managed to create the key tab entry that worked. We did this
earlier and now are at the subject errors instead of the original one.
We simply added the working entry into the ke
On 4/25/2017 4:42 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (25/04/17 16:35), Tom wrote:
We managed to create the key tab entry that worked. We did this earlier and
now are at the subject errors instead of the original one.
We simply added the working entry into the keytab as a suggested and that moved
On (25/04/17 16:35), Tom wrote:
>We managed to create the key tab entry that worked. We did this earlier and
>now are at the subject errors instead of the original one.
>
>We simply added the working entry into the keytab as a suggested and that
>moved us to the subject errors.
>
>The error code
Is it possible to email the configuration and logs to RH only?
Cheers,
Tom
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 4:22 PM, Justin Stephenson wrote:
>
> SSSD searches for a principal to use in the keytab based on the following
> priority:
>
> * Priority of lookup:
> 1) our.hostname
We managed to create the key tab entry that worked. We did this earlier and
now are at the subject errors instead of the original one.
We simply added the working entry into the keytab as a suggested and that moved
us to the subject errors.
The error code now is:
1765328360 which is preceeded
SSSD searches for a principal to use in the keytab based on the
following priority:
* Priority of lookup:
1) our.hostname@REALM or host/our.hostname@REALM depending on the
input
2) SHORT.HOSTNAME$@REALM (AD domain)
3) host/our.hostname@REALM
4) foobar$@REALM (AD domain
On (25/04/17 15:26), Tom wrote:
>Wondering if there are any more suggestions on this topic?
>
Which version of sssd do you use?
Do I understand it correctly that workaround with ldap_sasl_authid
does not work?
Could you provide log files? It would be good to sanitize
just a domain part of hostnam
Wondering if there are any more suggestions on this topic?
Cheers,
Tom
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 3:17 AM, TomK wrote:
>
>> On 4/25/2017 2:00 AM, TomK wrote:
>>> On 4/24/2017 9:40 PM, TomK wrote:
On 4/24/2017 12:41 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:22:0
On 4/25/2017 2:00 AM, TomK wrote:
On 4/24/2017 9:40 PM, TomK wrote:
On 4/24/2017 12:41 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:22:02PM -0400, TomK wrote:
On 4/21/2017 9:48 PM, TomK wrote:
Hey All,
We are connecting a set of servers directly with AD. The AD computer
object is create
On 4/24/2017 9:40 PM, TomK wrote:
On 4/24/2017 12:41 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:22:02PM -0400, TomK wrote:
On 4/21/2017 9:48 PM, TomK wrote:
Hey All,
We are connecting a set of servers directly with AD. The AD computer
object is created for the host and is associated to
On 4/24/2017 12:41 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:22:02PM -0400, TomK wrote:
On 4/21/2017 9:48 PM, TomK wrote:
Hey All,
We are connecting a set of servers directly with AD. The AD computer
object is created for the host and is associated to a service account.
This service ac
On (24/04/17 18:41), Sumit Bose wrote:
>On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:22:02PM -0400, TomK wrote:
>> On 4/21/2017 9:48 PM, TomK wrote:
>> > Hey All,
>> >
>> > We are connecting a set of servers directly with AD. The AD computer
>> > object is created for the host and is associated to a service accoun
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:22:02PM -0400, TomK wrote:
> On 4/21/2017 9:48 PM, TomK wrote:
> > Hey All,
> >
> > We are connecting a set of servers directly with AD. The AD computer
> > object is created for the host and is associated to a service account.
> > This service account works well with o
13 matches
Mail list logo
