Open mmoser-aires opened 2 years ago
The words in the docs about RFC3928 came from Norbert's wiki, which I imported into our docs unchanged at some point. it is actually unclear to me why we'd need 3928 to offer slave support in LDAP. As far as I can tell, "all" we need is for somebody to type in the code.
Short description
LDAP Backend | Slave Support
Usecase
Slave support for Authoritative server running LDAP backend (if not full features).
Description
I've loosely followed LDAP backend for PDNS for some time, even following Norbert Sendetzky's wiki back when it existed. As I understand it; slave support is not able to be implemented as there is no way for the master to notify slave's of changes. I opened an issue with 389-DS (I recall OpenLDAP being a hard 'no' years ago) to gauge the feasibility of the addition of RFC3928 support. The feedback there was to see if
syncrepl
orpersistent search
are viable use cases for PDNS. My knowledge of LDAP is not that deep to speak to these topics, so I am hopeful that if an alternative to RFC3928 is possible that by filing this I can hopefully find someone that is that is motivated enable all of PDNS's features to the LDAP backend.I love PDNS; fantastic software. I'd love to see it run 100% on an LDAP backend one day!