Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Fri Aug 8 19:04:48 GMT 2008
On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 10:21:30AM -0700, Douglas VanLeuven wrote:
> Volker Lendecke wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 07:43:09AM -0400, simo wrote:
> >>If we salvage the "default" option we can still have great flexibility
> >>w/o too much pain. Moving to a per range allocator would make things
> >>simpler to understand from a configuration POV, although it would
> >Sorry, but here I disagree. Having multiple allocators is
> >bad from my point of view. I don't understand the scenario
> >that you want to cover with it.
> I was at sea when you started this thread or I would have commented
> earlier. I'm unclear about one implication.
> What about the case of idmap_ad which is not writable but desired to be
> the default with a tdb backend for local accounts each with different
> uid/gid ranges?
> Is the new system going to work for that scenario?
Make tdb the default backend (i.e. configured with "idmap
backend"), but configure the explicit idmap_ad backend with
"idmap config <YOUR_OWN_DOMAIN>".
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20080808/1f4f4a50/attachment.bin
More information about the samba-technical