Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On 09/30/2010 12:03 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> ok, then I understood it wrong. So your suggestion is to translate the
> DNs to the corresponding CNs and return them together with the plain
> names from memberNisNetgroup to glibc and do not do any nested group
> unrolling in sssd.
> I'm fine with this scheme. As mentioned earlier I think we should agree
> on a basic solution for a start and should add optimizations based on
> Use-Cases later.
Ok, just to summarize:
The plan will be that for ALL memberNisNetgroup entries, we will
normalize them as names of netgroups if they are DNs, and then we will
return all of them to glibc rather than attempting to internally resolve
Is this an accurate summary?
sssd-devel mailing list
Engineering Manager IPA project,
Red Hat Inc.
Looking to carve out IT costs?