On 22 August 2017 at 08:33, Lachlan Musicman <datakid(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 22 August 2017 at 00:46, Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:24:50AM +1000, Lachlan Musicman wrote:
> > On 18 August 2017 at 17:33, Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm. Weird. We are still seeing the "AD group not reflected in
cache"
> > problem and am not seeing evidence of SSSD updating from the IPA server
> on
> > request (via login from other machine, via id command).
>
Just to follow up on this, I've done a comparative test.
On a machine in which <user> comes up correctly (all groups, properly
over-written by ipa's idview) and one in which the same <user> does not.
Note that both machines are on the same network, run the same OS and SSSD
versions.
When I run the following on both servers:
sss_cache -u <user>
'id <user>’
On the sssd client that returns the correct data, sssd_<domain>.log shows:
....
(Tue Aug 22 13:13:17 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[sss_domain_get_state] (0x1000): Domain
sub.domain.com is Active
(Tue Aug 22 13:13:17 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[sss_domain_get_state] (0x1000): Domain
sub.domain.com is Active
(Tue Aug 22 13:13:17 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[sysdb_set_entry_attr] (0x0200): Entry
[name=<user>,cn=users,cn=domain.com,cn=sysdb]
has set [ts_cache] attrs.
(Tue Aug 22 13:13:17 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]] [dp_req_done]
(0x0400): DP Request [Account #5760]: Request handler finished [0]: Success
(Tue Aug 22 13:13:17 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]] [_dp_req_recv]
(0x0400): DP Request [Account #5760]: Receiving request data.
....
On the sssd client which does *not* return the correct data,
sssd_<domain>.log shows:
....
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[sss_domain_get_state] (0x1000): Domain
sub.domain.com is Active
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[sss_domain_get_state] (0x1000): Domain
sub.domain.com is Active
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[sysdb_set_cache_entry_attr] (0x0080): ldb_modify failed: [No such
object](32)[ldb_wait: No such object (32)]
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[sysdb_set_cache_entry_attr] (0x0400): No such entry
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[sysdb_set_entry_attr] (0x0080): Cannot set attrs for
name=<user>,cn=users,cn=domain.com,cn=sysdb, 2 [No such file or directory]
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]] [sysdb_store_user]
(0x0040): Cache update failed: 2
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]] [sysdb_store_user]
(0x0400): Error: 2 (No such file or directory)
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[ipa_s2n_save_objects] (0x0040): sysdb_store_user failed [2]: No such file
or directory
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[ipa_s2n_get_user_done] (0x0040): ipa_s2n_save_objects failed.
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]] [dp_req_done]
(0x0400): DP Request [Account #400]: Request handler finished [0]: Success
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]] [_dp_req_recv]
(0x0400): DP Request [Account #400]: Receiving request data.
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[dp_req_reply_list_success] (0x0400): DP Request [Account #400]: Finished.
Success.
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]] [dp_req_reply_std]
(0x1000): DP Request [Account #400]: Returning [Success]: 0,0,Success
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]]
[dp_table_value_destructor] (0x0400): Removing
[0:1:0x0001:1::domain.com:name=<user>]
from reply table
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]] [dp_req_destructor]
(0x0400): DP Request [Account #400]: Request removed.
(Tue Aug 22 12:54:25 2017) [sssd[be[sub.domain.com]]] [dp_req_destructor]
(0x0400): Number of active DP request: 0
....
The difference is
[sysdb_set_cache_entry_attr] (0x0080): ldb_modify failed: [No such
object](32)[ldb_wait: No such object (32)]
What is that? Why is that failing?
Is it because <user> is already cached against the AD UID instead of the
IPA UID so the command isn't finding <user> in the ldb?
Cheers
L.