Replication: 1 DN for all slaves.

[lauro@npd.ufsc.br]

 Hi,

 Do you think it's a bad practice to have one DN shared between all  
slaves? Of course this DN is different from the rootdn. My ideas why  
it's not:

 - I have to worry about one pair dn/pass, I still have to worry  
about security on all slave server machines, that's the main problem,  
I know, but there are so many passwords, minimize that can be good.

 - If someone manages to get the DN pass, he/she can write to the  
master (since on the master that DN has write access to "*", then all  
the slaves, even the ones not hacked, will get that new compromised  
tree. If replication were not automatic, having one dn/pass to each  
slave would allow me to have some slaves with a "good" tree on the  
event someone gets the dn/pass of a slave, and then writing on the  
master would not affect all slaves. Since it is automatic.. and I have  
no reason to make happen by human interaction, one slave affected  
means all slaves and the server affected, even with different  
DN's/passwords.

 Did I miss anything?

 thanks,

 Lauro

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.