I just want to add that our SUSE 10 clients do not have this problem at all. On 9/11/07, George Holbert <gholbert at broadcom.com> wrote: > > > > Thanks for your quick reply, it is hard to believe Redhat's Fedora DS > > has such problem on their OS. > > Actually this is more related to the pam and nss_ldap libraries from > PADL, which RedHat (and pretty much everyone else) bundles with their Linux. > It's unlikely that recent improvements to PADL's software will show up > in RHEL3 or RHEL4, but sometimes certain bugfixes are backported by RedHat. > > > Hai Wu wrote: > > Thanks for your quick reply, it is hard to believe Redhat's Fedora DS > > has such problem on their OS. > > I tried to reduce bind_timelimit from 3 to 1 and it almost reduced the > > delay to an acceptable(but still noticeable) level, I think we will > > do this if there is no side effect to have such a small > > bind_timelimit. In the meaning time, I will stick to my > > taking-primary-IP workaround which reduces the delay to zero. > > > > On 9/11/07, George Holbert <gholbert at broadcom.com> wrote: > > > >> This is just the way it is with pam/nss_ldap as bundled in RHEL3 and > >> RHEL4. There is no easy fix. > >> If you like, you can reduce bind_timelimit to something very small. But > >> this still isn't much of a solution, since clients will definitely > >> notice when the primary is down. > >> It's possible that newer versions of pam/nss_ldap handle failover more > >> elegantly (I've seen notes to this effect in their Changelog). I > >> haven't tested this myself yet. > >> Another possibility is to put some kind of load balancer in front of > >> your LDAP servers, which hides from clients the failure of any > >> individual LDAP server. > >> > >> > >> Hai Wu wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> We are using fedora 1.0.4, When the first ldap server dies and does not ping, > >>> the clients can still bind to second server but it is very slow to do > >>> anything on clients, opening a terminal or listing a dir takes a few > >>> seconds. I find when ldap service is down on the first server but > >>> server it still up and pingable, there is no delay on clients at all, > >>> so I have the workaround to set up a eth0:0 on second ldap server(or > >>> any other machine) to assume the IP of the first ldap server when > >>> first ldap server does not ping. > >>> > >>> Please see our /etc/ldap.conf and /etc/openldap/ldap.conf , we have > >>> only Rhel 3 and 4 clients. Any idea how to fix this? > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> Mark > >>> > >>> /etc/ldap.conf > >>> host 1.1.1.1 2.2.2.2 > >>> port 636 > >>> ldap_version 3 > >>> base o=unix,dc=company,dc=com > >>> scope sub > >>> timelimit 5 > >>> bind_timelimit 3 > >>> pam_filter objectclass=posixAccount > >>> pam_login_attribute uid > >>> pam_member_attribute memberUid > >>> pam_password crypt > >>> idle_timelimit 3600 > >>> > >>> /etc/openldap/ldap.conf > >>> BASE o=unix,dc=company,dc=com > >>> HOST 1.1.1.1 2.2.2.2 > >>> PORT 636 > >>> > >>> SIZELIMIT 0 > >>> TIMELIMIT 0 > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Fedora-directory-users mailing list > >>> Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com > >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Fedora-directory-users mailing list > >> Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com > >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Fedora-directory-users mailing list > > Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > > > > > > > > -- > Fedora-directory-users mailing list > Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users >
