[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: invalid syntax on pwdPolicy object add
- To: Openldap technical <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: invalid syntax on pwdPolicy object add
- From: Julien Vehent <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 19:04:42 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=linuxwall.info; h= mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:date:from:to :subject:message-id; s=lnw-dkim; bh=xyDNOo5PkuwQ52xW+72s36g07U++ ooB1aYfV9dn8D/I=; b=gPWfEH8IdbmMMjgNUyt2HOrL4qX9Xnly/BRXiJI/qlyW 3MkcEwHjud9Qg8gE7GGTLO8HmUQnW7hlXlgcxHR82veyC3vzmq2oUT4DCpQGudGD Pxnyrmn5vIIxsWdIWM55EnWYMsfKjaWX6ezoevvkAPBK0ikDAGzRO2IuQJiVuvg=
- Organization: linuxwall.info
- User-agent: Linuxwall Roundcube Webmail/0.4-beta
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:51:01 +0200, Emmanuel Lecharny <email@example.com> wrote:
On 9/14/10 8:40 AM, mailing lists wrote:
I think that the pwdAttribute needs an OID value (specified by the syntax)
so you would must use the OID of the userPassword attribute which is
I thought that would be a possibility for the failure Kiran and Julien are facing, (please guys, can you give it a try ?), but IMO, there is no reason why we would not be allowed to use 'userPassword' in this context.
Using the OID instead of the alias name does not carry any extra information, as soon as the alias is valid accordingly to the schema (whatever it represents, be it an AT, OC, MR, or any of the other kind of schema objects). The syntax should just check that the alias is syntaxically correct. It's up to the ppolicy overlay to check that the value is a valid AT.
Plus the error message is really misleading if this is the cause for the error.
I tried with the OID... same thing.
How can I check that the module is properly loaded and functional ?