[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH] 1051 Fix CS replica management

[Jan Cholasta]

On 9.10.2012 21:31, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> Martin Kosek wrote:
>> On 10/08/2012 05:12 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 20.9.2012 19:38, Rob Crittenden wrote:
>>>> Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Dne 31.8.2012 19:43, Rob Crittenden napsal(a):
>>>>>> The naming in CS replication agreements is different from IPA
>>>>>> agreements, we have to live with what the create. The master side
>>>>>> should
>>>>>> be on the local side, replica1, not the remote. This required
>>>>>> reversing
>>>>>> a few master variables.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pass in the force flag to del_link.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do a better job of finding the agreements on each side.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This should be ipa-csreplica-manage more in line with
>>>>>> ipa-replica-manage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> rob
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Rob, can you please rebase the patch on top of current master? There
>>>>> were some dogtag 10 related changes to ipa-csreplica-manage since you
>>>>> posted the patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Honza
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I re-tested after the merge and found some problems with my initial
>>>> approach. The problem stems from the naming convention that dogtag uses
>>>> when creating the initial agreements. It is hard to predict how things
>>>> were set up later so rather than trying to reconstruct the DN we search
>>>> for it and pass it when deleting agreements.
>>>>
>>>> rob
>>>
>>> So far I have found this:
>>>
>>>    * Deleting a "bridge" link that connects two "islands" of replicas
>>> works, but
>>> it should not (I was told that this is expected, as no complex graph
>>> algorithms
>>> are engaged to detect this kind of errors).
>>
>> Exactly, I hit this error when I was a similar Rob's patch for
>> ipa-replica-manage (ticket 2797). I used topology "A - B - C - D - E"
>> and I was
>> able to delete C. We may want to log an enhancement ticket for this.
>>
>> Martin
>>
>
> Right, and ipa-csreplica-manage doesn't even have the basic last_link
> checking code that ipa-replica-manage has, nor the ruv code. We decided
> to push that to a future release.
>
> This patch should fix up the basics.
>
> rob

This fixes everything except I'm still unable to delete a master from a 
master that is not directly connected to it. If this is OK, then ACK.

Honza

-- 
Jan Cholasta