On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 02:58:06PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: > On (11/04/16 13:39), Jakub Hrozek wrote: > >On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 01:12:51PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: > >> ehlo, > >> > >> following patch help me to find out issues with GPO. > >> I think it might be useful also in other cases. > >> > >> But ideal would be if fail-over code would print port as well. > >> ATM "0" is logged as a port with AD. > > > >That's because 'port' has a special meaning in the failover code. > >It's not the networking port, but just an abstract object that binds together > >services. And we chose server 0 in the past for AD and IPA because we > >wanted to make sure that identity lookups and authentication are always > >performed against the same server to make sure we don't hit replication > >issues. Otherwise we might be talking to one DC for LDAP lookups and > >another for KDC.. > Thank you for explanation. > It was very confusing to me that "server" has port but "service" > does not have a port. I would expect other way. > > And I would say ti might be confusing for users when they try to troubleshoot > something. We might use different name then "port"
Yes, feel free to file a ticket to rename the internal terminology. I already saw some users confused about using port 0, too. _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
