Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "afda".
Did you mean:
ada
2016 Sep 19
0
Error "Failed extended allocation RID pool operation..."
...CN=RID Set,CN=DC1,OU=Domain Controllers,DC=example,DC=us
<https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc220818.aspx>
cn: RID-Next-RID
ldapDisplayName: rIDNextRID
attributeId: 1.2.840.113556.1.4.374
attributeSyntax: 2.5.5.9
omSyntax: 2
isSingleValued: TRUE
schemaIdGuid: 6617188c-8f3c-11d0-afda-00c04fd930c9
systemOnly: TRUE
searchFlags: 0
systemFlags: FLAG_SCHEMA_BASE_OBJECT | FLAG_ATTR_NOT_REPLICATED
schemaFlagsEx: FLAG_ATTR_IS_CRITICAL
--
Adam Tauno Williams <mailto:awilliam at whitemice.org> GPG D95ED383
Systems Administrator, Python Developer, LPI / NCLA
2024 Oct 29
1
Garbage collection of tombstones is failing due to missing objects
...de": 32,
"status": "No such object",
"operation": "Delete",
"remoteAddress": null,
"performedAsSystem": false,
"userSid": "S-1-5-18",
"dn": "CN=[...]\\0ADEL:cd01e963-eecd-4bb5-afda-eaac5513a120,CN=Deleted
Objects,DC=[...]",
"transactionId": "1be00222-448e-4d0a-86b1-1e905d82fa1b",
"sessionId": "f635f124-fcfa-40ad-9048-c2729c7738d9"
}}
A manual search in the database shows that the objects are indeed not
present. In fact, no...
2016 Sep 19
4
Error "Failed extended allocation RID pool operation..."
Package: sernet-samba-4.2.14-23.el6.x86_64
These DCs were very recently upgraded from a prior version.
[2016/09/19 09:32:55.168161, 0]
../source4/libcli/smb2/signing.c:116(smb2_check_signature)
Bad SMB2 signature for message of size 202
[2016/09/19 09:32:55.168511, 0] ../lib/util/util.c:559(dump_data)
[0000] 77 B3 94 9B 70 78 8B 21 1E 56 D0 78 E1 80 BB 5C w...px.!
.V.x...\
[2016/09/19
2016 Sep 19
2
Error "Failed extended allocation RID pool operation..."
...ample,DC=us
>
> <https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc220818.aspx>
> cn: RID-Next-RID
> ldapDisplayName: rIDNextRID
> attributeId: 1.2.840.113556.1.4.374
> attributeSyntax: 2.5.5.9
> omSyntax: 2
> isSingleValued: TRUE
> schemaIdGuid: 6617188c-8f3c-11d0-afda-00c04fd930c9
> systemOnly: TRUE
> searchFlags: 0
> systemFlags: FLAG_SCHEMA_BASE_OBJECT | FLAG_ATTR_NOT_REPLICATED
> schemaFlagsEx: FLAG_ATTR_IS_CRITICAL
>
>
No it shouldn't be replicated, the big hint is
'FLAG_ATTR_NOT_REPLICATED', it should only be on the DC...