Re: Document use of ldapurl with LDAP simple bind

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Document use of ldapurl with LDAP simple bind
Date: 2024-06-28 07:11:42
Message-ID: 99058de4-bf2a-497a-91a3-537228ad143f@eisentraut.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 24.05.24 20:54, Jacob Champion wrote:
> Our documentation implies that the ldapurl setting in pg_hba is used
> for search+bind mode only. It was pointed out to me recently that this
> is not true, and if you're dealing with simple bind on a non-standard
> scheme or port, then ldapurl makes the HBA easier to read:
>
> ... ldap ldapurl="ldaps://ldap.example.net:49151" ldapprefix="cn="
> ldapsuffix=", dc=example, dc=net"
>
> 0001 tries to document this helpful behavior a little better, and 0002
> pins it with a test. WDYT?

Yes, this looks correct. Since ldapurl is really just a shorthand that
is expanded to various other parameters, it makes sense that it would
work for simple bind as well.

hba.c has this error message:

"cannot use ldapbasedn, ldapbinddn, ldapbindpasswd, ldapsearchattribute,
ldapsearchfilter, or ldapurl together with ldapprefix"

This appears to imply that specifying ldapurl is only applicable for
search+bind. Maybe that whole message should be simplified to something
like

"configuration mixes arguments for simple bind and search+bind"

(The old wording also ignores that the error might arise via "ldapsuffix".)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Guo 2024-06-28 07:21:35 Re: Support "Right Semi Join" plan shapes
Previous Message Philippe BEAUDOIN 2024-06-28 07:06:40 Re: Adminpack removal