[SSSD] [PATCH] AD: Always refresh LDAP subdomain list

Jakub Hrozek jhrozek at redhat.com
Wed Dec 18 16:34:30 UTC 2013


On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 02:58:17PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 05:34:44PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 05:02:07PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:09:58PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:05:16PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:03:11PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 12:04:44PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 10:18:32PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I found this bug when testing the GC patches. Previously, when SSSD was
> > > > > > > > started, but subdomains list was up-to-date, the ad_ctx was not
> > > > > > > > initialized for the subdomain.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I was also thinking whether we should re-initialize the domain-realm
> > > > > > > > mappings after sssd startup, the way we re-initialize kdcinfo files. I
> > > > > > > > don't think it's strictly necessary because if someone deletes a file in
> > > > > > > > /var/lib/sss/pubconf, he should keep the broken pieces, but perhaps we
> > > > > > > > should be at least aware..
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Maybe we can do this during the init phase of the responder? We
> > > > 
> > > > ah, sorry, I had the typo here                          ^^^^^^^^ first.
> > > > I meant to call it during the initialization of the subdomain part of
> > > > the AD and IPA providers.
> > > > 
> > > > bye,
> > > > Sumit
> > > 
> > > That makes perfect sense :-)
> > > 
> > > See the attached patch, I moved the code to a separate function.
> > 
> > Actually, I did one more change in the original patch and also did a
> > similar change in the IPA provider. The result is a second patch. I
> > mostly split the patches into two because the IPA patch is a
> > convenience, so from my point of view it's fine to fix it in master
> > only. The first one is something I'd like in sssd-1-11, too.
> 
> ACK to both. I do not see a reason why the IPA patch should not be
> pushed to 1.11.
> 
> bye,
> Sumit

Thanks for the review, pushed to master and sssd-1-11



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list