Re: push-mode syncrepl and structuralObjectClass

[Alex Bramley <alexeb@transitive.com>]

Howard Chu wrote:
> No. If the Bind with updateDN was successful this error will never
> appear.

It certainly appears that binding with the updateDN was successful from
the logs -- could it be because I am using the rootDN as the updateDN?

Tony Earnshaw wrote:
> However, one would still need a chain directive in the last consumer,
> which I don't think I saw. It should then update the provider, not
> the "pivot" - unless the "pivot" were also configured to chain to the
> original provider.

But my consumer is supposed to be a read-only slave -- I don't want any
updates coming from it, and anyway it won't be able to reach the master
provider through our internal firewalls. I'm not even sure why I needed 
the updateref configuration directive, but it seemed to fix things. I'm 
going to mess with my configuration and see if I can narrow down the 
problems some more...

Incidentally, I should probably mention that this is debian etch's
OpenLDAP 2.3.30 (but there is no possibility of changing this,
unfortunately).

Nevertheless, this is getting away from my main issue, which is that of 
removing the posixAccount and shadowAccount objectClasses from the 
replicated user data (unless I am attempting to solve the wrong problem).

Cheers,
--alex