12:38 p.m.
Hi Folks,
I'm having a problem that I'm going to go bald trying to solve, it seems...
I've been tasked with creating a single searchable suffix for two
different trees (dc=one,dc=com and dc=two,dc=com for arguments sake).
The application that needs this suffix doesn't deal with referals, so
my first (and the obvious, I thought) solution won't work.
I delved into the Administrator's Guide and discovered the section on
chained suffixes (ie., Directory Links), and it seems good. The
problem? I can't make it work right.
On a test server, I've set up a "master" suffix, "dc=com", and
created
directory links to "dc=one,dc=com" and "dc=two,dc=com". I've
added
the proxy ACI on the One and Two LDAP directories. When I search the
test server, I can successfully find objects in the One tree, so it's
half working -- but the Two tree doesn't work. I've check and
re-checked and everything appears kosher.
Am I barking up the wrong tree? Is there an easier way to do this?
Should I give up and take up basket weaving as a nice, harmless job,
and forget systems administration altogether?
Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.
--
_ Ben Steeves bcs(a)metacon.ca
( ) The ASCII ribbon campaign ben.steeves(a)unb.ca
X against HTML e-mail GPG ID: 0xB3EBF1D9
/ \ http://www.metacon.ca/ascii Yahoo Messenger: ben_steeves
3:53 p.m.
Ben Steeves wrote:
Hi Folks,
I'm having a problem that I'm going to go bald trying to solve, it
seems...
I've been tasked with creating a single searchable suffix for two
different trees (dc=one,dc=com and dc=two,dc=com for arguments sake).
The application that needs this suffix doesn't deal with referals, so
my first (and the obvious, I thought) solution won't work.
I delved into the Administrator's Guide and discovered the section on
chained suffixes (ie., Directory Links), and it seems good. The
problem? I can't make it work right.
On a test server, I've set up a "master" suffix, "dc=com", and
created
directory links to "dc=one,dc=com" and "dc=two,dc=com". I've
added
the proxy ACI on the One and Two LDAP directories. When I search the
test server, I can successfully find objects in the One tree, so it's
half working -- but the Two tree doesn't work. I've check and
re-checked and everything appears kosher.
Does the other LDAP server have dc=com
and two sub suffixes
dc=one,dc=com and dc=two,dc=com? Each with their own "real" database?
Am I barking up the wrong tree? Is there an easier way to do this?
Should I give up and take up basket weaving as a nice, harmless job,
and forget systems administration altogether?
It's difficult to say for sure
without reviewing all of your configuration.
Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.
11:51 a.m.
On 5/29/06, Richard Megginson <rmeggins(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On a test server, I've set up a "master" suffix,
"dc=com", and created
> directory links to "dc=one,dc=com" and "dc=two,dc=com".
I've added
> the proxy ACI on the One and Two LDAP directories. When I search the
> test server, I can successfully find objects in the One tree, so it's
> half working -- but the Two tree doesn't work. I've check and
> re-checked and everything appears kosher.
Does the other LDAP server have dc=com and two sub suffixes
dc=one,dc=com and dc=two,dc=com? Each with their own "real" database?
Thanks for taking the time to reply, Richard...
The server with the real databases has two suffixes: "dc=one,dc=com"
and "dc=two,dc=com". "dc=com" doesn't exist. Both suffixes have
real
databaes and work if I query them individually.
I wouldn't be so frustrated if nothing was working, but the fact that
searching with a base of "dc=com" for a UID that appears in
"dc=one,dc=com" works but searching for a UID that appears in
"dc=two,dc=com" doesn't is what's really bugging me. I went so far as
deleting the "dc=one,dc=com" link, but the Two link still doesn't
work, even if it's the only one. The root ACIs on One and Two are
exactly the same (with the obvious changes for the different suffixes
of course).
>
> Am I barking up the wrong tree? Is there an easier way to do this?
> Should I give up and take up basket weaving as a nice, harmless job,
> and forget systems administration altogether?
It's difficult to say for sure without reviewing all of your configuration.
Anything semi-specific you'd be curious about?
--
_ Ben Steeves bcs(a)metacon.ca
( ) The ASCII ribbon campaign ben.steeves(a)unb.ca
X against HTML e-mail GPG ID: 0xB3EBF1D9
/ \ http://www.metacon.ca/ascii Yahoo Messenger: ben_steeves
12:11 p.m.
Ben Steeves wrote:
On 5/29/06, Richard Megginson <rmeggins(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > On a test server, I've set up a "master" suffix,
"dc=com", and created
> > directory links to "dc=one,dc=com" and "dc=two,dc=com".
I've added
> > the proxy ACI on the One and Two LDAP directories. When I search the
> > test server, I can successfully find objects in the One tree, so it's
> > half working -- but the Two tree doesn't work. I've check and
> > re-checked and everything appears kosher.
> Does the other LDAP server have dc=com and two sub suffixes
> dc=one,dc=com and dc=two,dc=com? Each with their own "real" database?
Thanks for taking the time to reply, Richard...
The server with the real databases has two suffixes: "dc=one,dc=com"
and "dc=two,dc=com". "dc=com" doesn't exist. Both suffixes have
real
databaes and work if I query them individually.
I wouldn't be so frustrated if nothing was working, but the fact that
searching with a base of "dc=com" for a UID that appears in
"dc=one,dc=com" works but searching for a UID that appears in
"dc=two,dc=com" doesn't is what's really bugging me. I went so far as
deleting the "dc=one,dc=com" link, but the Two link still doesn't
work, even if it's the only one. The root ACIs on One and Two are
exactly the same (with the obvious changes for the different suffixes
of course).
You could try enabling the trace level logging and the plugin level
logging for the error log - perhaps there is a clue in the error log.
> >
> > Am I barking up the wrong tree? Is there an easier way to do this?
> > Should I give up and take up basket weaving as a nice, harmless job,
> > and forget systems administration altogether?
> It's difficult to say for sure without reviewing all of your
> configuration.
Anything semi-specific you'd be curious about?
9:08 a.m.
On 5/31/06, Richard Megginson <rmeggins(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> I wouldn't be so frustrated if nothing was working, but the
fact that
> searching with a base of "dc=com" for a UID that appears in
> "dc=one,dc=com" works but searching for a UID that appears in
> "dc=two,dc=com" doesn't is what's really bugging me. I went so
far as
> deleting the "dc=one,dc=com" link, but the Two link still doesn't
> work, even if it's the only one. The root ACIs on One and Two are
> exactly the same (with the obvious changes for the different suffixes
> of course).
You could try enabling the trace level logging and the plugin level
logging for the error log - perhaps there is a clue in the error log.
I turned on every bit of logging I could find and there were no
substantive differences in the logs between a successful search on
domain One with an unsuccessful search on domain Two except for where
the result was passed back -- no errors or anything.
I'm beginning to suspect the problem lies in the fact that the
"target" directories are running Sun One DS 5.1 -- I'm going to
install an FDS test server and replicate the data there and try again.
--
_ Ben Steeves bcs(a)metacon.ca
( ) The ASCII ribbon campaign ben.steeves(a)unb.ca
X against HTML e-mail GPG ID: 0xB3EBF1D9
/ \ http://www.metacon.ca/ascii Yahoo Messenger: ben_steeves
6532
days inactive
6535
days old
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Ben Steeves -
Rich Megginson