[midPoint] New ldap connector and auxiliary objectClasses

midpoint at mybtinternet.com midpoint at mybtinternet.com
Thu Nov 5 13:40:34 CET 2015


Hi,
  I have not tried talking to AD, not in the new env, but have used the snapshot connector on OpenDJ ...
  Also had to switch to connector-ldap-1.4.2.0-20151029.212327-51.jar as the other (older) was
  replaced.
  Can confirm this works nicely with my use of auxiliary objectClasses. Also, I like the feel of the new
  connector; much cleaner ... great job!
  One thing I did notice; I delete the older connector using REST on build phase. The new resource
  is created using the new connector also during build. As I also update system configuration, a
  restart of midPoint is required. Post restart, the older connector is back in the list of connectors.
Regards,
  Anton
----Original message----
>From : jeverling at bshp.edu
Date : 26/10/2015 - 19:38 (GMT)
To : midpoint at lists.evolveum.com
Subject : Re: [midPoint] New ldap connector and auxiliary objectClasses
That is good news! I don't think, out of all the other systems I looked at a while back, had this type of feature or on any of their road maps, they all required a connector server. We do not use the scripting or exchange features, we use Office 365/Google Apps which currently has their own sync running.
I will also test it out in my dev environment and report anything,
JASON
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Ivan Noris <ivan.noris at evolveum.com> wrote:
  
    
  
  
    Hi Jason,
    
    yes, with some restrictions - no home directory creation, no
    scripting on server side, no Exchange support.
    
    My coleagues are already testing/deploying the connector and (will)
    have more real-life experiences soon. I expect I will probably also
    deploy it the following weeks.
    
    Regards,
    Ivan
    
    
On 10/23/2015 09:59 PM, Jason Everling
      wrote:
    
    
      
A built-in AD connector? Wow, that is great! Does
        that mean we would not have to rely on a connector server
        anymore?
        
        
        
JASON
      
      
        
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:25 AM,
          Radovan Semancik <radovan.semancik at evolveum.com>
          wrote:
          Hi,
              
              On 10/23/2015 03:20 PM, midpoint at mybtinternet.com
              wrote:
              
                   I agree with your principals around retrieving and
                interpreting the schema. However,
                   attribute names are not supposed to be case
                sensitive. I have worked with many
                   servers, and have only encountered one that was. I
                believe this was configurable
                   in that particular server.
              
              
            
            Yes, that's right. They are not supposed to be case
            sensitive. But I think it is good practice for operations to
            use the same capitalization as is specified in the schema. I
            have seen some problems with this in the past. I'm not sure
            how much this applies to current LDAP servers, but it is
            perhaps better to stay on the safe side. And the same
            applies to object classes. Actually, I have seen a problem
            with objectclass name capitalization just a couple of days
            ago ...
              
              
                   As for the server that provided no syntax
                definitions; wow!! I have not encountered
                   that before ... do you mean when querying the server
                or no syntax period?
              
              
            
            Actually, the attributeTypes definition provided syntax OID
            (otherwise it would be a complete disaster). But there was
            no ldapSyntaxes definition. None at all. Fortunately, the
            Apache Directory API still works with this. Just instead of
            attributeType.getSyntax().getOid() I had to use
            attibuteType.getSyntaxOid() - which seems to be the same but
            it is not. The former takes OID from ldapSyntaxes
            definition, the latter takes it from attributeTypes
            definition. So obviously, the former fails if there are no
            ldapSyntaxes definition. Simple fix, but unless you
            encounter a server like that it is hard to believe that this
            can actually happen ...
            
            So, the bottom line is that the more LDAP servers are tested
            with the new LDAP connector the more robust it will become.
            For now we have tested it with OpenLDAP, OpenDJ, OpenDS,
            389ds, eDirectory and Active Directory. I'd appreciate
            reports of connector success/failure with any other
            directory server.
            
              
                
                -- 
                Radovan Semancik
                Software Architect
                evolveum.com
                
                _______________________________________________
                midPoint mailing list
                midPoint at lists.evolveum.com
                http://lists.evolveum.com/mailman/listinfo/midpoint
              
            
          
        
        
        
        
        
        -- 
        
          
JASON
        
      
      
      
        
        CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
        This e-mail together with any attachments is proprietary and
        confidential; intended for only the recipient(s) named above and
        may contain information that is privileged. You should not
        retain, copy or use this e-mail or any attachments for any
        purpose, or disclose all or any part of the contents to any
        person. Any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail are those
        of the author and do not represent those of the Baptist School
        of Health Professions. If you have received this e-mail in
        error, or are not the named recipient(s), you are hereby
        notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying
        of this communication is prohibited by the sender and to do so
        might constitute a violation of the Electronic Communications
        Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. section 2510-2521. Please immediately
        notify the sender and delete this e-mail and any attachments
        from your computer. 
      
      
      
      
_______________________________________________
midPoint mailing list
midPoint at lists.evolveum.com
http://lists.evolveum.com/mailman/listinfo/midpoint
    
    
    
-- 
  Ing. Ivan Noris
  Senior Identity Management Engineer & IDM Architect
  evolveum.com                     evolveum.com/blog/
  ___________________________________________________
  "Semper Id(e)M Vix."
  
_______________________________________________
midPoint mailing list
midPoint at lists.evolveum.com
http://lists.evolveum.com/mailman/listinfo/midpoint
-- 
JASON
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This e-mail together with any attachments is proprietary and confidential; intended for only the recipient(s) named above and may contain information that is privileged. You should not retain, copy or use this e-mail or any attachments for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of the contents to any person. Any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the author and do not represent those of the Baptist School of Health Professions. If you have received this e-mail in error, or are not the named recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited by the sender and to do so might constitute a violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. section 2510-2521. Please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.evolveum.com/pipermail/midpoint/attachments/20151105/4876be1a/attachment.htm>


More information about the midPoint mailing list