Bug 3276 - sambaLogonTime and sambaLogoffTime aren't updated when using ldapsam backend
Summary: sambaLogonTime and sambaLogoffTime aren't updated when using ldapsam backend
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Samba 3.0
Classification: Unclassified
Component: User/Group Accounts (show other bugs)
Version: 3.0.9
Hardware: Other Linux
: P3 enhancement
Target Milestone: none
Assignee: Samba Bugzilla Account
QA Contact: Samba QA Contact
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-11-22 10:13 UTC by Carlos Santiviago
Modified: 2006-01-04 06:47 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Carlos Santiviago 2005-11-22 10:13:40 UTC
I've been doing some tests, and looks like these two attributes aren't updated when using ldapsam backend. Haven't tried the others.

I know we can use some script in the netlogon share to know when the user logged in, but shouldn't those attributes do that?

http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2005-October/112575.html

Others have reported the same issue. Although its not a big issue, it would be nice to have them working.

An idea could be taken from:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/2004-June/036049.html
Comment 1 Carlos Santiviago 2005-12-21 06:44:07 UTC
After IRC conversations:
11:37 < segfault> any update on this: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3276 ?
11:39 < vl> segfault: This would introduce a hell lot of LDAP replication traffic, that's why we don't do it. And logofftime
            is essentially impossible, a Windows box does not tell us.
11:41 < segfault> humm, i see
11:42 < segfault> i'll close the bug then
11:42 < gd> vl: well, at least we could add the logon timestamp, activated via "ldapsam:update_logon_time=yes" or something
            like that, then users who really want this (for whatever reason) can have it while the others are not confronted
            with massive writes (esp. in replicating setups). Sounds reasonable?
11:42 < vl> gd: Yes, sort of.
Comment 2 Carlos Santiviago 2006-01-04 06:47:21 UTC
For those who needs it, please read:

http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2006-January/115883.html