On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 05:15:41PM -, john.bowman--- via FreeIPA-users
wrote:
> Which path would be better? Upgrading sssd on the older machines or
> attempting to delete the ldap entries?
I think you want to fix the server side, upgrading sssd is just a quick
kludge to let you access th
Which path would be better? Upgrading sssd on the older machines or attempting
to delete the ldap entries? Both eventually? Does having the namingConflict
entries pose a threat to the system stability?
___
FreeIPA-users mailing list -- freeipa-users
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 01:07:27PM -, john.bowman--- via FreeIPA-users
wrote:
> You'll have to forgive my ignorance here since I'm still fairly new to IPA
> and fortunately haven't run in to many issues as of yet.
>
> The three IPA 3.0 servers all have what look to be following conflicts:
>
You'll have to forgive my ignorance here since I'm still fairly new to IPA and
fortunately haven't run in to many issues as of yet.
The three IPA 3.0 servers all have what look to be following conflicts:
$ ldapsearch -D "cn=directory manager" -w secret -b "dc=domain,dc=tld"
"nsds5ReplConflict=
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 04:28:13AM -, john.bowman--- via FreeIPA-users
wrote:
> After upping the log levels on sssd on one of the failing servers I saw this
> in one of the sssd log files:
>
> from sssd_pamd.log:
>
> (Wed Jun 14 23:16:05 2017) [sssd[pam]] [sss_ncache_check_str] (0x2000):
>
After upping the log levels on sssd on one of the failing servers I saw this in
one of the sssd log files:
from sssd_pamd.log:
(Wed Jun 14 23:16:05 2017) [sssd[pam]] [sss_ncache_check_str] (0x2000):
Checking negative cache for [NCE/USER/domain.tld/jbowman]
(Wed Jun 14 23:16:05 2017) [sssd[pam]]