[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Slapd startup behavior when unable to bind to an interface

To: openldap-devel@openldap.org
Subject: Re: Slapd startup behavior when unable to bind to an interface
From: Ryan Tandy <ryan@nardis.ca>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 19:06:58 -0800
Content-disposition: inline
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nardis.ca; s=google; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Ih/fUCj76iFIu5uBKruCFatJ+gg+9vJWQUDe3jfYxkk=; b=TNorfLCviFsUj0UZvneDtQ8Gg0Sp54ZBLcnqdIanRHOwP5Uf/2SI4VuTHlvsDfYsZ2 ua7C6KnsdVbcY9nhgTSEV1cA/bt22vn61m/yehjsrz/mgONFVT+Yl1sH0/zZtsHgJMPQ ck48tn01eebK80T+6H4m8WrQz8ACIL1b1pxGQ=
In-reply-to: <3C4675616E42CA0200E4AE9A@[192.168.1.9]>
References: <3C4675616E42CA0200E4AE9A@[192.168.1.9]>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 03:48:12PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:

This is fairly trivial to reproduce.  As a non-privileged user, simply do:

-h "ldap:// ldapi://slapd.sock"
It will fail to bind to 389, but bind to the LDAPI socket anyway, andcontinue the startup process.

I was sure I saw this at the time when we were talking about it in IRC,but now I can't get it to reproduce again. Guess I screwed up.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Slapd startup behavior when unable to bind to an interface
  - From: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@zimbra.com>

References:
- Slapd startup behavior when unable to bind to an interface
  - From: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@zimbra.com>

Prev by Date: Dropping the MozNSS crypto bits from OpenLDAP
Next by Date: Re: Slapd startup behavior when unable to bind to an interface
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread