Hi Philip,

If you can't post it, could you please email me a *working* LDIF file of
Section 18.3.3 "N-Way Multi-Master"?
(I can substitute my real values if you keep the "$xxx" labels in there, of
course.)

My comments in-line below.

Thanks in advance

Fal


On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Philip Guenther <
[email protected]> wrote:

> NOTE: I am not an OpenLDAP project developer and do not have any sort of
> commit rights to any part of it.
>
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2013, fal patel wrote:
> > Thank you very much for your emails.
> >
> > Well, it doesn't work for me, and hasn't for the two weeks I've been
> > wrestling with it.
> >
> > Could you please post a *working* LDIF file of Section 18.3.3 "N-Way
> > Multi-Master"?
> > (I can substitute my real values if you keep the "$xxx" labels in there,
> of
> > course.)
>
> The LDIF in that section on the website apepars, to my eyes, to be
> acceptable, on a piece-wise basis BY THE ldapadd AND/OR ldapmodify
> PROGRAMS INCLUDED IN OPENLDAP.
>
>
It should be acceptable as an LDIF as input to slapadd.
If it is not, it is buggy by definition.
Remember, we should be able to perform database configuration OFF-LINE.
ie. without slapd running.
And obviously when off-line, slapadd works whereas ldapmodify, ldapadd etc.
cannot.


>
> If you cannot figure out how to set up your server to that its cn=config
> tree can modified with ldapadd and ldapmodify, then stop playing with
> replication and figure that out.
>
> On the contrary.
See above.


>
> > I want to be able to feed the above LDIF file in to slapadd and obtain
> > both config db replication and also data replication.
>
> Nope, sorry, that's not something that the project documents.  It may be
> possible in some cases but in general you need to use ldapmodify
>
> No.
>
The DB on-line configuration case should be supported, of course.
And so should the DB off-line configuration case.



> I stand by my assertion that not all the chunks there are valid RFC 2849
> LDIF.  OpenLDAP's ldapmodify accepts them, but at least this chunk may be
> rejected by other tools that comply with the standard and cannot be
> considered portable
>      dn: cn=config
>      changetype: modify
>      replace: olcServerID
>      olcServerID: 1 $URI1
>      olcServerID: 2 $URI2
>      olcServerID: 3 $URI3
>
> as it lacks the required terminating "-" line.
>

Yes, because the Section 8.3.3 "N-Way Multi-Master" document/code from the
OpenLDAP Administrator's Guide lacks the terminating  "-" after modify (and
in several places too), it is not valid LDIF syntax.
So, it is buggy.
So, it should be fixed.


Philip Guenther
>

Reply via email to