Re: [SOLVED] Re: chain overlay does an anonymous bind and ignores the ch

Re: [SOLVED] Re: chain overlay does an anonymous bind and ignores the chain binddn (v2.4.44)

To: "openldap-technical@openldap.org" <openldap-technical@openldap.org>

Subject: Re: [SOLVED] Re: chain overlay does an anonymous bind and ignores the chain binddn (v2.4.44)

From: mailing lists <listas.correo@yahoo.es>

Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 11:16:30 +0000 (UTC)

Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.es; s=s2048; t=1494242217; bh=NZGxkhyuvCRgvxiZKxi3YvjeGwgiAo3sjE4J5oa/+VI=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Subject; b=IiCnuH3MJ2uDXgjUSGRjAa/lqur1mahdx6Dx2EkNlVs+W4TfzWAisTxaRV1bQmWJ2I71jS5Lh+YVlTHEdQUerQ1llFCwqERaxLTbQQrL1+xQVrZdhY/cfQQZ3gPjZ0HoDiNrta0S0jEwoJYP6EjOdXPM14WVscJWfRJ72LotLlULeJkD/2welgpO9j21BapWVZcbXIerq75m2I135/KeAGRbeUcH2E/KmZAsBTJuWMJZsDErLEwcUFM4jis6VIUd/Be9opzImkh1WyI/sgBH08PP1T/AVaWxOlGLARz2XMLcX/orr4C+92atksdRSfHPdMPyXG9M4nkR8WI0qxrv2Q==

In-reply-to: <D9904EB8C3F7A1912B892F01@[192.168.1.19]>

References: <685444107.6182891.1492688188961.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <685444107.6182891.1492688188961@mail.yahoo.com> <WM!329d10ddee4d4a598a488a9e301355e8c89e0431d2af68bea710359741596085c7f7f819dff9c27c436b5cf44792b1f0!@mailstronghold-2.zmailcloud.com> <40cf40e4-9683-444a-35aa-1bf715d111dd@symas.com> <2102133683.1034802.1493734999387@mail.yahoo.com> <1270246176.5541378.1493976453016@mail.yahoo.com> <WM!c1ee84f102b801ce472e98760c131bd96a9ebd2da30e1039892559f2b84deda56d389bf858bd2be60ee6f0d6ea798410!@mailstronghold-1.zmailcloud.com> <D9904EB8C3F7A1912B892F01@[192.168.1.19]>

Hello Quanah,

the directive I meant was updateref (which uses an URL), not updatedn, sorry for adding confussion to the thread.

As I comment in my original post:

http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/201704/msg00045.html

if I add the port to the updateref directive I can reproduce the behaviour (anonymous bind vs bind with the identity configurated in the chain overlay) only by switching the updateref beetwen the url with port and without it.

On Saturday, May 6, 2017 10:05 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@symas.com> wrote:

--On Friday, May 05, 2017 10:27 AM +0000 mailing lists
<listas.correo@yahoo.es> wrote:

>> config to the config used in that test?
>
>
>
> the chain works as expected, with the identity configurated, if the port
> is not included in the updatedn.

An DN by definition wouldn't contain port information. Can you provide a
real example of the problem and how you fixed it?

--Quanah

--

Quanah Gibson-Mount
Product Architect
Symas Corporation
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
<http://www.symas.com>