[SSSD-users] ddns updates not required?

Simo Sorce simo at redhat.com
Sun Jun 8 17:44:38 UTC 2014

On Sun, 2014-06-08 at 12:15 +0200, steve wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-06-07 at 18:49 +0100, John Hodrien wrote:
> > On 7 Jun 2014 18:38, steve <steve at steve-ss.com> wrote:
> > > Hi
> > > Thanks.
> > > Yes, same here. Even though bind allows the signed updates from sssd, we
> > > don't need them. We can authenticate using sssd no matter what IP is
> > > assigned and no matter what is stored in AD. Maybe the ddns requirement
> > > could be removed from the default ad-backend?
> > 
> > You can hijack a keytab from another machine and use it for sssd, so correct DNS really doesn't matter for pure sssd operation.  You'll only cause bother for things using kerberos auth as a service (say samba/http/NFS/SSH), which if you like such things is a big deal.
> It doesn't seem to matter either. sssd autofs cifs works fine
> irrespective of dns. 

The reason why DNS updates matter is that if your client ever needs to
be a *server*, then you want to be able to actually "find" it.

Think laptops that expose SSH in order to be accessed for admin

If your client never exposes any services/never needs to be contacted
from a remote party and use Kerberos as authentication then it is not
strictly required to update the DNS, though it is nice to know the right

We do enable it by default because in some environment DNS-scrubbing is
used, ie if the client doesn't update the DNS for long enough it is
considered old and the whole computer account may be nuked.


Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

More information about the sssd-users mailing list