On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:46:41PM -0400, Yassir Elley wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 12:03:57PM +0200, Sumit Bose wrote: > > > > On a separate topic, I am wondering if we should complete the review of > > > > the current patch and push it to master, before I potentially add a > > > > file-based approached and/or an enhanced gpo_child design. This would > > > > keep the current patch from growing even bigger. Also, the current patch > > > > produces correct results, so others could play with it (even if we are > > > > planning on changing to a file-based approach later on). What do you > > > > think? > > > > > > I think it's ok. > > > > Yes, me too, as long as the code is permissive or disabled (for now!), I'm > > fine. > > _______________________________________________ > > sssd-devel mailing list > > sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org > > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel > > > > I submitted a patch to the list some time ago ("AD: Add support for gpo > permissive mode"). It is waiting for code review. Currently (without the > patch), access control is always enforced. However, with the patch, access > control will only be enforced if the ad_gpo_access_control option is > explicitly set to "enforcing" (default is "permissive"). > > Thanks, > Yassir.
Ah, you're right, I was under the impression it was already pushed. Sorry about that. _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
