[389-users] Re: Auditing Tool for Directory Server

Thanks William, that helped. On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 8:40 AM, William Brown wrote: > On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 08:24 +0530, Dhiraj Deshpande wrote: > > For e.g x user's lastlogon information. > > > > ntUserLastLogon: 131064093305375272 > > > > Need to convert it into IST. > > >

[389-users] Re: Auditing Tool for Directory Server

On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 08:24 +0530, Dhiraj Deshpande wrote: > For e.g x user's lastlogon information. > > ntUserLastLogon: 131064093305375272 > > Need to convert it into IST. >

[389-users] Re: Auditing Tool for Directory Server

For e.g x user's lastlogon information. ntUserLastLogon: 131064093305375272 Need to convert it into IST. On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 4:13 AM, William Brown wrote: > On Mon, 2016-05-16 at 10:00 +0530, Dhiraj Deshpande wrote: > > Hi William, > > > > I tried querying that but not

[389-users] Re: Sync problems with AD 2012 R2

Thanks a lot, Alberto! I've opened a ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48841 On 05/17/2016 12:27 PM, Alberto Viana wrote: Noriko, /I have one question. In your first email, you wrote this, in which the problem is in 2012R2, but not in 2008R2./ *Sorry, I don't have any 2008 r2 in

[389-users] x-forwarded-for

We run a cluster of directory servers (4 masters, 2 hubs, 14 slaves) behind a set of F5 Bigip load balancers.  Our Bigip admins recently decided to switch the boxes to "one-armed" mode and that services would have to use X-Forwarded-For headers or equivalent to get the actual client IP address.  

[389-users] Re: Sync problems with AD 2012 R2

Noriko, *I have one question. In your first email, you wrote this, in which the problem is in 2012R2, but not in 2008R2.* *Sorry, I don't have any 2008 r2 in my lab... I just tested with 2012 r2 and it failed. * *Here's my scenarios* *My lab environment:* *389-ds-base 1.3.4.8 + win 2012 r2*

[389-users] Re: Sync problems with AD 2012 R2

Thank you for your input, Alberto. On 05/17/2016 07:38 AM, Alberto Viana wrote: Rich, I'm aware of that, what I'm trying to say is: Is the expected behavior to sync do not complete or stop because of one or more OUs does not exists in one of the sides (389 or AD)? Is not suppose to just

[389-users] Re: Sync problems with AD 2012 R2

Rich, I'm aware of that, what I'm trying to say is: Is the expected behavior to sync do not complete or stop because of one or more OUs does not exists in one of the sides (389 or AD)? Is not suppose to just generate some error and must go on? Thanx On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Rich

[389-users] Re: Sync problems with AD 2012 R2

On 05/17/2016 08:01 AM, Alberto Viana wrote: Noriko, Just to let you know, after I replicated/created the exactly same OU structure on both side, the replication seems to works fine. I'm still not sure that is the expected behavior: Yes, it is. Winsync does _not_ sync the OU structure -

[389-users] Re: Sync problems with AD 2012 R2

Noriko, Just to let you know, after I replicated/created the exactly same OU structure on both side, the replication seems to works fine. I'm still not sure that is the expected behavior: [17/May/2016:10:56:53 -0300] - windows_conn_connect : detected Win2k3 or later peer [17/May/2016:10:56:53

[389-users] Re: Sync problems with AD 2012 R2

Noriko, *Did you use the same version of 389-ds-base against AD on 2008 R2 and 2012 R2?* *389-Directory/1.3.4.8 B2016.063.1654* *Please share the output frpm this command line "rpm -q 389-ds-base"?* *I compiled 389 manually once the package in apt repo is too old for me (I'm

[389-users] Re: Latest version of 389 for Centos 7

Many thanks for confirming, and sorry for the multiple posts. On 16 May 2016 at 23:45, William Brown wrote: > On Mon, 2016-05-16 at 13:08 +0100, Richard Tearle wrote: > > Hello > > > > What is the latest version of 389 (-ds-base) available via RPMs for > > Centos7? Yum is