Hi,
I have 389 DS (1.2.10.7 version)
I am getting confusing ldapsearch results when I use two classic CoS entries
defined under the same subtree in order to have the subtree accounts assigned
with one of two different values of a shared/generated attribute - in my case
pwdpolicysubentry attribute.
I want to point out that a mechanism of generating shared attributes by both
CoS entries work as expected and that I defined them via bash script and not
over 389 Management Console or ns-newpwdpolicy.pl script(they both work with
pointer CoS and I needed classic CoS).
Also, all generated attributes are visible in the Console. This is also ok.
In the first test, I had in both CoS's definition entries (I will mark them
here as 1) and 2) ) the "operational-default" qualifier:
cosattribute: pwdpolicysubentry operational-default.
Hence, I expected that the below search would not return any of the entries
with generated attributes... but it did -all of them.
(Entries were returned without generated attributes: this is OK as
pwdpolicysubentry is an operational attribute)
# ldapsearch -x -ZZ -h localhost -D "cn=directory manager" -b
"ou=people,dc=example,dc=com" -w secret -s
sub "(pwdpolicysubentry=*)" "*"
I got the same result when in both 1) and 2) a qualifier was just
cosattribute: pwdpolicysubentry operational
that I consider as correct.
When I modified 1) and 2) CoS definition entries to be:
cosattribute: pwdpolicysubentry
the ldapsearch returned none of them, but only an entry that has
pwdpolicysubentry of its own.
Nothing changed when I put "default" qualifier explicitly.
What I expected was to return all entries - those with their own
pwdpolicysubentry and the others (with the generated one). (In my example,
entries with generated attributes do not have their own attributes).
Finally, and the most confusing case:
1) cosattribute: pwdpolicysubentry
while in
2) cosattribute: pwdpolicysubentry operational
returned them all as if the qualifier in 2) have impact on CoS 1) qualifier
(?!)
Do you know if my version(1.2.10.7) of the server has any bug related to CoS
definitions or I am something wrong?
If you need more information, please ask.
Thank you,
Jovan Vukotic
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
