Grouper Users - Open Discussion List

[Tom Zeller <>]

That does seem odd. If you would like to post sanitized config files
on- or off-list, I can take a look. I know you did not change much,
but it helps me understand.

ldappcng.xml
ldappc-resolver.xml
ldappc.properties
sources.xml

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Klug, Lawrence 
<>
 wrote:
> Tom,
>
> It's working now.  I'm seeing people as  'hasMember'  attributes of Groups 
> in the LDAP directory.  Oddly enough, it didn't work until the I started 
> adding groups to other groups.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lawrence
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> 
>  
> [mailto:]
>  On Behalf Of Tom Zeller
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2011 11:34 AM
> To: Klug, Lawrence
> Cc: 
> 
> Subject: Re: [grouper-users] LDAPPCNG 2.0 testing
>
> I should include example configs for an ldap subject source.
>
> In ldappcng.xml you should see something like this :
>
>  <reference ref="members-jdbc" toObject="member" />
>
> and in ldappc-resolver.xml you should see
>
>  <resolver:AttributeDefinition id="members-jdbc"
> xsi:type="grouper:Member" sourceAttributeID="members">
>    <resolver:Dependency ref="GroupDataConnector" />
>    <grouper:Attribute id="id" source="jdbc" />
>  </resolver:AttributeDefinition>
>
> You probably aren't using a source, as defined in sources.xml, with the id 
> "jdbc". I suggest replacing "jdbc" with the id of the ldap subject source.
>
> Make sense ?
>
> [1] https://bugs.internet2.edu/jira/browse/GRP-646
>
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Klug, Lawrence 
> <>
>  wrote:
>> HI,
>>
>>
>>
>> We've been testing the LDAPPCNG 2.0 - created groups with the Admin UI
>> containing LDAP-based Subjects - used the sync command to provision
>> groups to the LDAP directory.   The Groups were provisioned, but the
>> member references do not appear to have been included.  I suspect
>> there is some configuration issue.
>>
>>
>>
>> The only file touched was ldappc.properties to specify the LDAP host,
>> connection credentials and base DN for people and groups.  Need more
>> information.  What am I missing?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Lawrence
>>
>>
>