[SSSD] [PATCH] Make offline status backend global

Stephen Gallagher sgallagh at redhat.com
Mon Sep 14 11:48:28 UTC 2009


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 09/13/2009 10:31 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> With this patch all the backend providers can share the same offline
> status. This means composite backends like what AD or IPA will be that
> use a mix of ldap and krb can share the offline status for both
> protocols.
> 
> A further extension might allow to have per protocol "online/offline"
> status, that will be done eventually when we integrate also the DNS
> discovery options.
> 
> Tested with ldap_id+ldap_auth and ldap_id+krb5_auth
> 
> Simo.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sssd-devel mailing list
> sssd-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
> https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel

Just a nitpick, but why did you replace sbus_conn_send_reply() in
be_check_online with sbus_get_connection and dbus_connection_send()?
They are functionally identical. (except that sbus_conn_send_reply() can
get the connection in one fewer stack frame, since it can access the
sbus_connection object directly)

Assuming I'm reading this correctly, we're talking about considering a
single backend process as being online or offline as a whole. Why is
this dependent only on the ID provider for the backend? Shouldn't we
consider that if the authentication module or password change modules
are offline that we are offline?

Furthermore, even if the ID provider is offline, if we have cached user
information that allows us to initiate a connection to a still-live
authentication provider, isn't that perfectly reasonable?

I'd argue that if any ONE of the modules was the ultimate determinator
of online/offline status, it should be authentication rather than
identification.

Code itself is sensible, so this is a Nack until you can convince me
that the approach itself is right.

- -- 
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761

Looking to carve out IT costs?
www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkquLYgACgkQeiVVYja6o6Nm+gCdErNOsdFbMcZQKF5RlUhOMxhj
gscAmgJnBx4a8s6XMD1QPeezFuiKVv72
=Oh2l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list