Re: bdb_equality_candidates: cn=config

hi, Am 08.02.2013 um 21:59 schrieb Hallvard Breien Furuseth : > > Check the file owner and permissions of the index files, can they be > read by the user which slapd runs as? If that's not the problem: all files created by slapd, so file permissions are correct. > I'd stop slapd, run slapind

ldapsearch and LDAP_CONTROL_VALSORT

Hi, I'm trying to use ldapsearch with LDAP_CONTROL_VALSORT (1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.666.5.14 ), does anybody know how to do that ? Here's what I did and the error I get: ldapsearch -x -W -D "cn=admin,dc=company,dc=com" -b "ou=people,dc=company,dc=com" -s subtree -e 1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.666.5.14 I get

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

thanks for that perl snippet it would be great to make it work with ldapsearch though, I'll make another post to see if someone has ever used it with ldapsearch Le 12/02/2013 00:33, Bill MacAllister a écrit : --On Monday, February 11, 2013 10:53:05 PM +0100 Benin Technologies wrote: th

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

--On Monday, February 11, 2013 10:53:05 PM +0100 Benin Technologies wrote: thanks for that info how do you use that control ? I tried the following : ldapsearch -x -W -D "cn=admin,dc=company,dc=com" -b "ou=people,dc=company,dc=com" -s subtree -e 1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.666.5.14 I get : # search

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

--On Monday, February 11, 2013 10:22 PM +0100 Pierangelo Masarati wrote: To perform a search that returns the weighted values the control LDAP_CONTROL_VALSORT (1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.666.5.14) must be specified. That's not documented in slapo-valsort(5), as far as I know. Fixed via ITS#7523. -

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

thanks for that info how do you use that control ? I tried the following : ldapsearch -x -W -D "cn=admin,dc=company,dc=com" -b "ou=people,dc=company,dc=com" -s subtree -e 1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.666.5.14 I get : # search result search: 2 result: 2 Protocol error text: valSort control value is absent

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

--On Monday, February 11, 2013 10:11 PM +0100 Pierangelo Masarati wrote: IMO this example clearly shows that the {} approach is a hack limited to certain use-cases (e.g. ACLs etc. in back-config). Perhaps valsort could return weights instead of stripping them off when the RFC 3296 manageDS

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

> > > --On Monday, February 11, 2013 09:42:55 PM +0100 Benin Technologies > wrote: > >> thanks, I agree, first I thought that weighted valsort could be used >> to give an importance grade to a set of attributes, but I agree, it >> seems it is of much limited use >> >> (other limitation : it's qui

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

> IMO this example clearly shows that the {} approach is a hack limited to > certain use-cases (e.g. ACLs etc. in back-config). Perhaps valsort could return weights instead of stripping them off when the RFC 3296 manageDSAit control is used. p. -- Pierangelo Masarati Associate Professor Dipart

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

--On Monday, February 11, 2013 09:42:55 PM +0100 Benin Technologies wrote: thanks, I agree, first I thought that weighted valsort could be used to give an importance grade to a set of attributes, but I agree, it seems it is of much limited use (other limitation : it's quite impossible to de

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

thanks, I agree, first I thought that weighted valsort could be used to give an importance grade to a set of attributes, but I agree, it seems it is of much limited use (other limitation : it's quite impossible to delete/modify a weighted entry, because you need to include the weight ({3} for

Re: Mirror mode difference from N-Way Multi-Master

In other words, if N-Way supports two masters writing while MM does not, how can it not have a different configuration? It has nothing to do with configuration of MMR, which I think is the point you're missing. It has purely to do with configuring it so only one master ever takes writes at a gi

Re: weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

IMO this example clearly shows that the {} approach is a hack limited to certain use-cases (e.g. ACLs etc. in back-config). Ciao, Michael. Benin Technologies wrote: > Hi Quanah, > > I just found an old post of yours, and I'd be interested to know if and how > you solved that problem, because I r

weighted valsort for telephone Numbers

Hi Quanah, I just found an old post of yours, and I'd be interested to know if and how you solved that problem, because I ran into the same need. Thanks Ben * *To*: *openldap-de...@openldap.org * * *Subject*: *valsort & telephoneNumber* * *From*: *Q

integrating open ldap with kerberos and ssl

Hello, Is it possible to get an open ldap support the both way of authentication?I have a open ldap integrated already with MIT kerberos, and I wonder if I can adapt it to support SSL/TLS as well.The problem is that some applications allow only for simple binding which is not possible with Kerb