[389-users] Referral errors ....

[Reinhard Nappert]

Rich,

I was able to get one box in this situation (not sure, how though). Do you want me do change some accesslog-levels or errorlog-levels?

Now would be a good time to gather more information

-Reinhard 

-----Original Message-----
From: 389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org [mailto:389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Richard Megginson
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 11:57 AM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Referral errors ....

> No replies so far. Does this mean nobody has seen this issue before?

I have not seen this.

Any errors in the errors log?
  
> -Reinhard
> 
> 
> From: 389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org
> [mailto:389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of 
> Reinhard Nappert
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 9:44 AM
> To: 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: [389-users] Referral errors ....
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
>  
> I have the following setup:
>  
> I have a 2 multimaster replication setup, where both masters also have 
> a number of shadowing agreements to other consumers. The data gets 
> replicated to all boxes and there are no issues. When I try to perform 
> an update on the slaves, it works on all, but one. Meaning, the server 
> sends back err=10, with the referral to one of the masters and the 
> client automatically follows the referrals. Unfortunately, it does not 
> works with one box:
>  
> When there is an attempt to write to the db, the server returns an 
> error-code 1, with the following message:
> javax.naming.NamingException: [LDAP: error code 1 - Mapping tree node 
> for o=base is set to return a referral, but no referral is configured 
> for it];
>  
> This can also be seen in the access file:
> 
> 
> [ 26/Apr/2011:05:35:45 -0300] conn=3418 op=13256 ADD dn="o u = test 
> ,o= base "
> [26/Apr/2011:05:35:45 -0300] conn=3418 op=13256 RESULT err=1 tag=105 
> nentries=0 etime=0
> 
> When I have a look at the configuration, it looks exactly like the
> others: dn: cn="o=Base",cn=mapping tree,cn=config objectClass: top
> objectClass: extensibleObject objectClass: nsMappingTree cn: "o=Base"
> nsslapd-state: referral on update nsslapd-backend: userRoot
> modifiersName: cn=server,cn=plugins,cn=config modifyTimestamp:
> 20100721202730Z nsslapd-referral: ldap://master-ld01:389/o=Base 
> nsslapd-referral : ldap://master-ld02:389/o=Base numSubordinates : 1
> dn: cn=replica,cn="o=Base",cn=mapping tree,cn=config
> nsDS5ReplicaBindDN: cn=replication,cn=config nsDS5ReplicaRoot: o=Base
> nsDS5Flags: 0 nsDS5ReplicaType: 2 nsds5ReplicaPurgeDelay: 43200
> objectClass: top objectClass: nsDS5Replica cn: replica modifiersName:
> cn=Multimaster Replication Plugin,cn=plugins,cn=config
> modifyTimestamp: 20110421052744Z nsDS5ReplicaId: 65535 nsState::
> //8AAAAAAADLv69NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALSoAAAAAAAAIAAAAAAAAAA==
> nsDS5ReplicaName: 59480b7e-94fb11df-9df8eeea-774385c0
> nsDS5ReplicaReferral: ldap://master-ld01:389/o=Base 
> nsDS5ReplicaReferral : ldap://master-ld02:389/o=Base   I was wondering 
> if someone has seen this kind of issue. Everything looks fine to me 
> and I can not explain this behavior.   Right now, I can not reproduce 
> this issue. I only see it in this one setup.   Thanks, -Reinhard
> --
> 389 users mailing list
> 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users