Hide Forgot
Description of problem: When I upgrade an IPA replica before the master, I don't see selinuxusermap entries added on master replicated to replica. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-11.el6.x86_64 ipa-server-3.0.0-26.el6_4.2.x86_64 How reproducible: seeing it consistently in upgrade test automation but, not consistent on manual. Steps to Reproduce: 1. On RHEL6.2, install IPA server, then replica, then client 2. add repo config pointing to a rhel6.4 repo on all servers 3. Upgrade IPA client with yum update ipa-server 4. Upgrade IPA replica with yum update ipa-server 5. Upgrade IPA master with yum update ipa-server On MASTER: 6. ipa user-add seluser1 --first=sel --last=user1 7. ipa selinuxusermap-add --hostcat=all --selinuxuser=staff_u:s0-s0:c0.c1023 serule1 8. ipa selinuxusermap-add-user --users=seluser1 serule1 On REPLICA: 9. ipa selinuxusermap-show serule1 NOTE: On automated tests where this has been seen, this is occuring after a few previous install/upgrade/uninstall tests where this error was not seen. Actual results: Not able to see selinuxusermap entried on replica that was created on master. [root@ipaqavmc slapd-TESTRELM-COM]# ipa selinuxusermap-show serule1 ipa: ERROR: serule1: SELinux User Map rule not found Expected results: Should see it on replica, same as master: [root@ipaqavmb slapd-TESTRELM-COM]# ipa selinuxusermap-show serule1 Rule name: serule1 SELinux User: staff_u:s0-s0:c0.c1023 Host category: all Enabled: TRUE Users: jordan Additional info:
Created attachment 747768 [details] slapd log from master
Created attachment 747769 [details] slapd log from replica
Is this a 389-ds-base issue? Should I change the component?
Yes. The directory server supplier is sending over the same changes twice. The reason is because the RUV returned from the consumer (the Consumer RUV in the supplier error log) is bogus - the RUV element for the supplier (rid 4) is empty and even has the wrong port number in the pURL. The RUV element for the supplier should contain the max CSN of the most recent changes sent over. What I find odd is that we did a full complement of replication testing for RHEL 6.4 and we did not see this issue.
Ok. Changing the component. This bug do sounds like something we would want for RHEL-6.5 (also based on your additional investigation).
This is a case of a duplicate ADD - the entries were added directly to the replica earlier: [14/May/2013:12:57:00 -0400] conn=7 op=25 ADD dn="cn=selinux,dc=testrelm,dc=com" [14/May/2013:12:57:00 -0400] conn=7 op=25 RESULT err=0 tag=105 nentries=0 etime=0 csn=51926cdd000000030000 The replica was unable to send this change to the master because there was a problem with replication: [14/May/2013:12:57:00 -0400] slapi_ldap_bind - Error: could not perform interactive bind for id [] mech [GSSAPI]: error -2 (Local error) [14/May/2013:12:57:00 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389): Replication bind with GSSAPI auth failed: LDAP error -2 (Local error) (SASL(-1): generic failure: GSSAPI Error: Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information (Cannot determine realm for numeric host address)) replication resumes: [14/May/2013:12:59:12 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389): Replication bind with GSSAPI auth resumed schema repl issue: [14/May/2013:12:59:12 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389): Warning: unable to replicate schema: rc=1 The above add, and several other changes, appear to be missing from the supplier RUV: [14/May/2013:12:59:12 -0400] - _cl5PositionCursorForReplay (agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389)): Supplier RUV: [14/May/2013:12:59:12 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389): {replicageneration} 51926881000000040000 [14/May/2013:12:59:12 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389): {replica 3 ldap://ipaqavma.testrelm.com:389} 51926d51000000030000 51926d61000000030000 51926d60 Note that the min csn in the RUV element for the replica (rid 3) is 51926d51000000030000, which is greater than 51926cdd000000030000. But the consumer has this: [14/May/2013:12:59:12 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389): {replica 3 ldap://ipaqavma.testrelm.com:389} 51926887000800030000 51926cc4000000030000 00000000 51926cc4000000030000 is less than 51926cdd000000030000, so the master has not seen that change yet. The replica attempts to replay these changes to the master: [14/May/2013:12:59:12 -0400] agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389) - session start: anchorcsn=51926cc4000000030000 [14/May/2013:12:59:12 -0400] agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389) - clcache_load_buffer: rc=-30988 [14/May/2013:12:59:12 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - changelog program - agmt="cn=meToqe-blade-09.testrelm.com" (qe-blade-09:389): CSN 51926aa6000000040000 not found and no purging, probably a reinit So, for some reason, the replica doesn't have 51926cc4000000030000. This is a change which originated on the replica (rid 3) - not sure why it isn't found. Since it isn't found, it tries to use the min csn from the supplier, which is 51926d51000000030000, which skips the changes made earlier.
Upstream ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47362
TET RHEL64 Sending testcases/DS/6.0/mmrepl/accept/accept.sh Transmitting file data . Committed revision 7625.
TET trunk Sending testcases/DS/6.0/mmrepl/accept/accept.sh Transmitting file data . Committed revision 7626.
As per comment #17, marking this bug with qe_test_coverage+ flag.
TestCase [trac47362] result-> [PASS] with 389-ds-base-1.2.11.15-22
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-1653.html