[SSSD] [PATCH] Always mark SRV servers as primary

Jan Zelený jzeleny at redhat.com
Tue Aug 7 12:38:48 UTC 2012


Dne úterý 07 srpna 2012 08:12:44, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
> On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 10:23 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:48:14PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 18:11 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1459
> > > > 
> > > > I noticed this while trying to reproduce #1364. The SRV servers were
> > > > just silently skipped because they were not marked as primary.
> > > 
> > > Ack
> > 
> > Dmitri raised an interesting point in the ticket. Our documentation seems
> > to suggest the _srv_ servers can be present in the backup list.
> > 
> > I actually think we should just disallow that and only support host names
> > in the backup list (and I seem to remember that we said that the backup
> > server implementation would keep it simple and won't deal with SRV
> > servers at all).
> > 
> > Supporting _srv_ records would mean all kinds of interesting corner cases
> > like handling duplicates between the primary and secondary list on the
> > fly,
> > because you don't really know what the SRV query would yield.
> > 
> > We can't fix the documentation now that we're past the string freeze,
> > though..
> 
> We've got a couple other potential manpage issues that have come up as
> well. See https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1461 for an example.
> 
> I'm thinking it might be worth our while to make an announcement on
> Transifex that we're going to break string freeze this week because of
> some late-discovered issues and that we'll re-push the source strings on
> Friday.
> 
> With that in mind, I agree that we should probably restrict our usage to
> the primary servers at this time. Please recheck the code and make sure
> that's actually implemented that way as well. I'm CCing Jan directly to
> get his input.

I already discussed this with Jakub on IRC. I agree that disabling _srv_ 
support for backup server list is the most convenient solution. It's also the 
best one if we want this to be fixed quickly.

However I don't think there will be a lot of corner cases we will have to 
specifically handle in case we decide to do _srv_ support in backup server 
list. For example the issue with one server being able to be both in primary 
and backup list is there even if you don't use srv lookup. Fixing it should 
not be that difficult and extending the fix to cover _srv_ as well will take ~15 
copy-pasted lines from a brief overview of the code.

Thanks
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/sssd-devel/attachments/20120807/fda9cda7/attachment.sig>


More information about the sssd-devel mailing list