On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 08:15:14PM +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
> On 05/04/13 19:46, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>> On 04/05/2013 02:40 PM, Rowland Penny wrote:
>>> On 05/04/13 19:00, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 05:36:32PM +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
>>>>> On 05/04/13 17:05, Andreas Schneider wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday 05 April 2013 15:54:41 Rowland Penny wrote:
>>>>>>> On 05/04/13 15:35, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 11:20:44AM +0100, Rowland Penny
wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 02/04/13 22:39, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 01:42:46PM +0100, Rowland
Penny wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> With the AD provider you shouldn't be
needing any of the options
>>>>>>>>>>>> below.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The AD provider should just default to
them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there a reason you are using password
binds and not GSSAPI?
>>>>>>>>>>> OK, I have removed all the lines you
suggested and getent stopped
>>>>>>>>>>> working, examining
/var/log/sssd/sssd_DOMAIN.log gives the
>>>>>>>>>>> reason:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> (Tue Apr 2 12:52:55 2013) [sssd[be[DOMAIN]]]
[resolve_srv_send]
>>>>>>>>>>> (0x0400): SRV resolution of service
'AD'. Will use DNS discovery
>>>>>>>>>>> domain 'DOMAIN'
>>>>>>>>>>> (Tue Apr 2 12:52:55 2013) [sssd[be[DOMAIN]]]
[resolve_srv_cont]
>>>>>>>>>>> (0x0100): Searching for servers via SRV query
'_ldap._tcp.DOMAIN'
>>>>>>>>>>> (Tue Apr 2 12:52:55 2013)
[sssd[be[DOMAIN]]]
>>>>>>>>>>> [resolv_getsrv_send]
>>>>>>>>>>> (0x0100): Trying to resolve SRV record of
'_ldap._tcp.DOMAIN'
>>>>>>>>>>> (Tue Apr 2 12:52:55 2013)
[sssd[be[DOMAIN]]]
>>>>>>>>>>> [request_watch_destructor] (0x0400): Deleting
request watch
>>>>>>>>>>> (Tue Apr 2 12:52:55 2013) [sssd[be[DOMAIN]]]
[resolve_srv_done]
>>>>>>>>>>> (0x0020): SRV query failed: [Domain name not
found]
>>>>>>>>>>> (Tue Apr 2 12:52:55 2013)
[sssd[be[DOMAIN]]]
>>>>>>>>>>> [fo_set_port_status]
>>>>>>>>>>> (0x0100): Marking port 0 of server '(no
name)' as 'not working'
>>>>>>>>>>> (Tue Apr 2 12:52:55 2013)
[sssd[be[DOMAIN]]]
>>>>>>>>>>> [set_srv_data_status]
>>>>>>>>>>> (0x0100): Marking SRV lookup of service
'AD' as 'not resolved'
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It is trying to look up the samba domain name
instead of the
>>>>>>>>>>> the DNS
>>>>>>>>>>> domain.name, re-adding the following line
cures this:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> dns_discovery_domain = domain.lan
>>>>>>>>>> I see, this is interesting. Does the value of
dns_discovery_domain
>>>>>>>>>> differ from the value of ad_domain? If not, then
I would
>>>>>>>>>> consider it a
>>>>>>>>>> bug.
>>>>>>>>> I must have misunderstood you, because I turned off
'ad_domain =
>>>>>>>>> domain.lan'. I have now turned it back on again
and turned off the
>>>>>>>>> dns_discovery_domain line and it still works.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rowland
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think there are two options:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) keep using the ID mapping and tailor
the configuration of
>>>>>>>>>>>> the ID
>>>>>>>>>>>> mapper in the SSSD so that it generates
the same output as
>>>>>>>>>>>> the winbind
>>>>>>>>>>>> mapper. We've done this before,
it's not the nicest looking
>>>>>>>>>>>> configuration, but it works.
>>>>>>>>>>> What sssd ID mapping seems to do is, get the
last part of the SID
>>>>>>>>>>> and add a number to the front of it, is this
correct? and if so
>>>>>>>>>>> where does the number come from? and is this
the way Windows does
>>>>>>>>>>> it?
>>>>>>>>>> Correct, The first number is a hashed value of
the domain part
>>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>>> SID
>>>>>>>>>> and the "last part of the SID" is
usually called the RID.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can you check if setting
ldap_idmap_autorid_compat to True
>>>>>>>>>> would yield
>>>>>>>>>> the same IDs as winbind does? (Sorry I don't
have a box with
>>>>>>>>>> winbind
>>>>>>>>>> handy and I always forget the details).
>>>>>>>>> I have tried it and no it wouldn't, with S3
winbind I got:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> uid=21105(user) gid=20513(domain_users)
groups=20513(domain_users)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With the line added into sssd.conf and winbind turned
off, I now
>>>>>>>>> get:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> uid=201105(user) gid=200513(domain_users)
>>>>>>>>> groups=200513(domain_users)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When you say 'the same output as the
winbind mapper', which
>>>>>>>>>>> winbind
>>>>>>>>>>> are you refering to, the winbind on the Samba
4 server or the
>>>>>>>>>>> winbind on the Samba 3 client?
>>>>>>>>>> Both actually. You really want to have the IDs
consistent
>>>>>>>>>> everywhere.
>>>>>>>>> That is the problem, the built into samba4 winbind
returns
>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>> results:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> uid=3000016(DOMAIN\user) gid=100(users)
groups=100(users)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Switch to using POSIX IDs instead of
mapping them from
>>>>>>>>>>>> SIDs with
>>>>>>>>>>>> both
>>>>>>>>>>>> winbind and SSSD. All that should be
needed on the SSSD side
>>>>>>>>>>>> is set:
>>>>>>>>>>>> ldap_id_mapping = False
>>>>>>>>>>>> to sssd.conf and restart the SSSD (you
might need to rm the
>>>>>>>>>>>> cache as
>>>>>>>>>>>> SSSD doesn't really handle UID/GID
changes very well yet).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On the winbind side, I'm a little
fuzzy on the details, but I
>>>>>>>>>>>> believe
>>>>>>>>>>>> this could be done with "winbind nss
info" configuration option.
>>>>>>>>>>> The problem here is the use of winbind, I
cannot get the idmap_ad
>>>>>>>>>>> backend to work at all, and idmap_rid gives a
different uid
>>>>>>>>>> >from the
>>>>>>>>>>> Samba 4 server
>>>>>>>>>> So which mapper does the S4 server use?
>>>>>>>>> I do not know, I only know it is different from the
S3 winbind.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> From where I am 1) sounds like easier
to implement since
>>>>>>>>>>>> all you'd be
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> changing is sssd.conf
>>>>>>>>>>> I am being to think that the way forward is
to stop winbind on
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> Samba 4 server and use sssd instead.
>>>>>>>>>> That is a noble goal and one which we wanted to
accomplish in the
>>>>>>>>>> upcoming 1.10 release, but it was postponed to
the next one:
>>>>>>>>>>
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1534
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Samba server seems to be leveraging an
interface only
>>>>>>>>>> winbind is
>>>>>>>>>> able to serve at the moment to convert SIDs to
GIDs on the
>>>>>>>>>> server side.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't know all the details, sorry, maybe on
of the Samba
>>>>>>>>>> developers
>>>>>>>>>> lurking on this list would chime in.
>>>>>>>>> I don't understand this, by removing the S4
winbind links on the
>>>>>>>>> server and installing sssd 1.9.4, I appear to have
got it to work,
>>>>>>>>> I now have consistent uid's & gid's
without any real effort.
>>>>>>>> I had a short chat with the Samba Red Hat maintainer
Andreas
>>>>>>>> Schneider
>>>>>>>> (CC-ed) and he advised against removing winbind from the
server,
>>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm sure he'll provide a more qualified answer
than I can :-)
>>>>>>> Hi, on Samba 4 you get 2 winbind's, one is based on the
S3 code
>>>>>>> base and
>>>>>>> I think that I am right in saying that it will not start if
the samba
>>>>>>> (AD) daemon is run.
>>>>>> That's correct and the DC needs the 'builtin' winbind
daemon for
>>>>>> the DC to
>>>>>> function. It will not work with the s3fs winbind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The other is built into the samba daemon and
>>>>>>> requires the creation of a couple of symlinks to use winbind
in
>>>>>>> /etc/nsswitch.
>>>>>> What do you mean here?
>>>>> If, as I do, you compile Samba 4, you have to create a couple of
>>>>> symlinks:
>>>>>
>>>>> ln -s /usr/local/samba/lib/libnss_winbind.so.2
/lib/libnss_winbind.so
>>>>> ln -s /lib/libnss_winbind.so /lib/libnss_winbind.so.2
>>>>>
>>>>> Without these, you do not get any domain users etc from getent.
>>>>>
>>>> Truth be told, I've never compiled Samba from scratch myself, but
the
>>>> nssswitch libraries must be installed to /lib{,64}, are you sure there
>>>> isn't just a configure time switch for that?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> If you are talking about libnss_winbind.so, then as far as I know, no
>>> there isn't, you just have to create the two symlinks and add
>>> 'winbind' to the passwd & group lines in /etc/nsswitch.conf and
it works.
>>> If you do add the links etc then sssd does not work on the S4 server.
>>> As sssd seems to work better than winbind then I shall continue to use
>>> it, but what I cannot understand is why do I seem to get the feeling
>>> that you are trying to talk me out of using sssd.
>>>
>>> Rowland
>>>
>>>
>> On the samba file server or DC there other things that file server gets
>> directly from winbind that sssd does not have yet.
>> We are concerned that this would cause issues for you that you yet have
>> not seen. That would be the reason.
>> If you are willing to continue trying and are prepared to encounter
>> issues and report back then we are OK.
>>
> Could you give me some idea what sssd doesn't do that winbind does?
>
> As far as I can see, I get (via getent):
> uidNumber
> gidNumber
> unixhomedirectory
> loginShell
>
There is an interface for SID to name conversion in Samba and currently
only winbind implements the interface. We wanted to have a compatible
implementation done for 1.10 but we're probably not going to make it.
I don't know exactly from the top of my head what functionality the
samba server uses this interface for. Maybe Andreas or Sumit know?
> which as far as I can see is what winbind would give me.
>
> I can create directories & files and change ownership to a domain
> user &/or domain group, or in other words, I cannot tell the
> difference between using winbind or sssd except for the constant
> uidnumbers & gidnumbers.
_______________________________________________
sssd-users mailing list
sssd-users(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-users
OK, I admit it, I was wrong, you cannot use sssd ad mode on a Samba 4
server instead of winbind.
Everything seemed to work ok until I tried to use cifs to mount the
users homedirectory from the S4 server. It mounted ok and if you checked
the user permissions on the the server & client they matched, both names
& uid's. Getfacl showed that the user should be able to write to the
share, only the user couldn't, the user had no rights to their own
directory.
I can only assume that cifs somehow uses winbind on the server and gets
the uidnumbers that S4 winbind gives, these are different to what sssd
comes up with.
What (so far) seems to work is: use winbind on the S4 server, set the
uidNumber & gidNumber etc in the S4 LDAP for the users, no need for
posix objectclasses. Then set up sssd on the linux clients to pull from
ldap using kerberos.
Rowland
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.