On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 10:23 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:48:14PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 18:11 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1459
I noticed this while trying to reproduce #1364. The SRV servers were just silently skipped because they were not marked as primary.
Ack
Dmitri raised an interesting point in the ticket. Our documentation seems to suggest the _srv_ servers can be present in the backup list.
I actually think we should just disallow that and only support host names in the backup list (and I seem to remember that we said that the backup server implementation would keep it simple and won't deal with SRV servers at all).
Supporting _srv_ records would mean all kinds of interesting corner cases like handling duplicates between the primary and secondary list on the fly, because you don't really know what the SRV query would yield.
We can't fix the documentation now that we're past the string freeze, though..
We've got a couple other potential manpage issues that have come up as well. See https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1461 for an example.
I'm thinking it might be worth our while to make an announcement on Transifex that we're going to break string freeze this week because of some late-discovered issues and that we'll re-push the source strings on Friday.
With that in mind, I agree that we should probably restrict our usage to the primary servers at this time. Please recheck the code and make sure that's actually implemented that way as well. I'm CCing Jan directly to get his input.