Re: [SSSD] [PATCHES] DYNDNS: support mult. interfaces for dyndns_iface opt

[Pavel Reichl]

On 07/13/2015 12:04 PM, Martin Basti wrote:
>  On 10/07/15 20:16, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 05:52:20PM +0200, Martin Basti wrote:
> >> On 10/07/15 16:55, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 01:17:44PM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> >>>> While reading #2558 I noticed that there is a further request 
> >>>> relating to
> >>>> these patches - mbasti asks If there could be some mean how to 
> >>>> send IPs of
> >>>> all interfaces?
> >>>> Is this a good idea in general?
> >>>> I suppose I could implement it with some special value for 
> >>>> 'dyndns_iface' -
> >>>> ideally the special value would contain characters prohibited to 
> >>>> be part of
> >>>> interface name if there are such...
> >>> I would say this looks like a useful feature in general, but can 
> >>> you ask
> >>> Martin why he needs this feature? I think the time has come for 1.13
> >>> development to start turning into bug fixing more, so unless there is
> >>> really some particular use-case, please move the ticket into 1.14.
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> sssd-devel mailing list
> >>> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> >>> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
> >> This is blocker for https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4249
> >>
> >> Without this patch we cannot add dualstack and  multihomed support 
> >> to IPA
> >> clients, because when IPA adds all IP and IPv6 addresses to DNS, 
> >> then SSSD
> >> just deletes all records and put there just one address.
> > I can see the argument for dualstack -- we shouldn't remove v6 addresses
> > if we're talking to the server over v4 and conversely. I suspect the
> > multi-homed use-case is a bit less important, right?
>  Yes multihomed support is less important.
>
> >
> >> We want to support dualstack in IPA for long time. Several users wanted
> >> dualstack, even multihomed support.
> > Is there a corresponding IPA ticket or some link to a freeipa-users
> > thread?
> >
> > Please note I agree with the technical requirement, but there's limited
> > time, so we should prioritize.
> > _______________________________________________
> > sssd-devel mailing list
> > sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
>
>  IPv6 IPA tickets:
>
>  https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/query?keywords=~ipv6&status=!closed
>
>  Martin^2
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  sssd-devel mailing list
>  sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>  https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel 
Hello, please see updated patch set, 1st and 2nd patch were not changed 
(except for the ticket number in commit message).

I have tested the patches against IPA successfully, patches also work 
against AD but I'm seeing some problems in log - I have to investigate 
this thoroughly but I believe that the problem is rather 
miscommunication of AD then bug in my patches.

Thanks!