On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:26:09PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
>Yes, I don't have a problem with that. As long as priority
and weight
>are honored.
I have done it AD only after all. Enabling it for all providers
required more changes than expected. I don't think those changes
should be done in this state of development...
I like the new approach.
From 9c03180cadcc8bde2da5037156034ba4591a6c15 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Pavel=20B=C5=99ezina?= <pbrezina(a)redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 23:07:53 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] resolv_sort_srv_reply: remove unnecessary mem_ctx
ACK. This function is also unit-tested and the tests include leak
checks.
From 093a7292376593927b4bbaea29ccc208e83ff1a6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Pavel=20B=C5=99ezina?= <pbrezina(a)redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 11:52:42 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] fo srv: add priority and weight to fo_server_info
This will give SRV plugins all information needed for additional
sorting.
I don't see the weight used anywhere except the place where they are
assigned.
From dd634784178fad7a2c98d06a5c2316f546a9727a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Pavel=20B=C5=99ezina?= <pbrezina(a)redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 01:02:02 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] utils: add is_host_in_domain()
ACK
From 36610e77be90227e5e8c02fd1ea2192e3307059b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Pavel=20B=C5=99ezina?= <pbrezina(a)redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 16:02:51 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] ad srv: prefer servers that are in the same domain as
client
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2001 ACK