[SSSD] DESIGN: Multiple LDAP search bases

Jan Zeleny jzeleny at redhat.com
Mon Sep 12 16:05:54 UTC 2011


Dmitri Pal <dpal at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 09/12/2011 11:00 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > I do not like this approach, especially if done for a single option
> > among many other similar one, it makes the configuration file very odd.
> > 
> > Besides this is for feature parity with nss_ldap and there admins are
> > already use to something like ldap_<map>_search_base = a?b?c
> > I think we should maintain the convetion (I do not like it too much, but
> > it is a convention).
> 
> This is ugly. I do not like it. And it creates a bad presence of the
> unpredictable key names that can't be described in grammar or will make
> grammar for validation extremely complex.
> We have streamlined a lot of things and changed a lot of options to make
> them more usable. I do not see why we should follow the old style. It is
> a one time operation and creating additional search sections seems
> logical to me.

I agree. The old style might help admins with the change from nss_ldap, but 
what about the rest of them who didn't use it? IMO the ldap_<map>_search_base 
with delimiters is confusing.

> I would suggest presenting the two options to the user community on
> FreeIPA list and asking for their opinion.

Good idea

Jan



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list