IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
This drove me to strace before I understood what it really meant.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
This looks like a footnote, but is actually where the default password rules are applied.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
An intermittent problem I noticed with tests in the past is that the
setup can fail to create the base OU because it already exists.
I believe this is because the previous testenv DC has replicated out the
test object, but not its deletion at the point that the next testenv DC
starts running the test.
This only seemed to happen very occassionally (I haven't seen it
happen with getnc_unpriv yet, but I also haven't run it through the
autobuild yet).
Using same randomness in the test OU should help avoid this sort of
problem, and it matches what some other replication tests do.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Add some test cases to check for requests for invalid/non-existent DNs.
This exercises the first return case added in commit:
s4-drsuapi: Refuse to replicate an NC is that not actually an NC
I've also updated the error code returned here to match Windows.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
In general Windows seems to return BAD_DN rather than ACCESS_DENIED for
an unprivileged user. In the the long-term, it's unrealistic to think
that Samba and Windows will agree exactly on every error code returned.
So for the tests to be maintainable and pass against Windows and Samba,
they need to handle differences in expected errors. To get around this
problem, I've changed the expected_error to be a set, so that multiple
error codes (one for Microsoft, one for Samba) can be specified for each
test case. This approach also highlights the cases where Microsoft and
Samba currently differ.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
We were creating the getnc_state (and storing it on the connection)
before we had done some basic checks that the request was valid. If the
request was not valid and we returned early with an error, then the
partially-initialized getnc_state was left hanging on the connection.
The next request that got sent on the connection would try to use this,
rather than creating a new getnc_state from scratch.
The main side-effect of this was if you sent an invalid GetNCChanges
request twice, then it could be rejected the first time and accepted the
second time.
Note that although an invalid request was accepted, it would typically
not return any objects, so it would not actually leak any secure
information.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
In theory, if we send the exact same rejected request again, we should
get the same response back from the DC. However, we don't - the request
is accepted if we send it a second time.
This patch updates the repl_rodc test to demonstrate the problem (which
now causes the test to fail).
Note that although the bad GetNCChanges request is not rejected outright,
the response that gets sent back is empty - it has no objects in it, so
it's not an actual security hole. It is annoying problem for writing
self-tests though.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
The existing SOURCE_DISABLED error code doesn't seem to make a lot of
sense. Window sends back an ACCESS_DENIED error in the same situation,
which seems more appropriate.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
An important change in this patch is changing the ACE type from
A (Allow)
to
AO (Object Allow)
as that will then respect the supplied GUID, which we also make use
the constant from the security.idl.
This reworks the tests to check replication with users with the
following rights:
- only GET_CHANGES
- only GET_ALL_CHANGES
- both GET_CHANGES and GET_ALL_CHANGES
- no rights
We basically want to test various different GetNCChanges requests
against each type of user rights, and the only difference is the
error/success value we get back. I've structured the tests this way, so
that we have 4 test_repl_xyz_userpriv() functions (to cover each of the
above user rights cases), and each test sends the same series of
GetNCChanges requests of varying validity.
Currently all these tests fail against Samba because Samba sends
different error codes to Windows.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
This prevents replication of an OU, you must replicate a whole NC per Windows 2012R2
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
A is for Allow, OA is for Object Allow, which means check the GUID.
The previous ACE allowed all access, which was not the intention.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
We do not like fixed passwords
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12946
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Trying to use bstate->sam_ctx_system by mistake can cause crashes if
non-admin users replicate. To avoid this problem we use the sam_ctx
variable, however it wasn't used consistently everywhere. Replace the
remaining references to b_state->sam_ctx to avoid potential confusion.
This change was made based on review feedback from Metze.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Users who are not administrator do not get b_state->sam_ctx_system filled in.
We should probably use the 'sam_ctx' variable in all cases (instead of
b_state->sam_ctx*), but I'll make this change in a separate patch, so
that the bug fix remains independent from other tidy-ups.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12946
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12986
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
(cherry picked from heimdal commit 19f9fdbcea11013cf13ac72c416f161ee55dee2b)
Autobuild-User(master): Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Mon Aug 28 15:10:54 CEST 2017 on sn-devel-144
This is already fixed in master by
5eccc2fd0072409f166c63e6876266f926411423~10..5eccc2fd0072409f166c63e6876266f926411423.
Bug: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12903
Signed-off-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Sat Aug 26 05:05:08 CEST 2017 on sn-devel-144
If we do not 'break', we overrun the array access size.
Found by Coverity.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
The teardown functions should not return on error but finish cleaning
up!
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12984
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Guenther Deschner <gd@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Andreas Schneider <asn@cryptomilk.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Aug 24 13:23:22 CEST 2017 on sn-devel-144
Signed-off-by: Lumir Balhar <lbalhar@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlet <abartlet@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Andreas Schneider <asn@cryptomilk.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Tue Aug 22 17:38:17 CEST 2017 on sn-devel-144
Add a basic test that when we use GET_ANC and the parents have linked
attributes, then we receive all the expected links and all the expected
objects by the end of the test.
This extends the test code to track what linked attributes get received
and check whether they match what's present on the DC.
Also made some minor cleanups to store the received objects/links each
time we successfully receive a GETNCChanges response (this saves the
test case having to repeat this code every time).
Note that although this test involves linked attributes, it shouldn't
exercise the GET_TGT case at all.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
This test:
- creates blocks of parent/child objects
- modifies the parents, so the child gets received first in the
replication (which means the client has to use GET_ANC)
- checks that we always receive the parent before the child (if not, it
either retries with GET_ANC, or asserts if GET_ANC is already set)
- modifies the parent objects to change their USN while the
replication is in progress
- checks that all expected objects are received by the end of the
test
I've added a repl_get_next() function to help simulate a client's
behaviour - if it encounters an object it doesn't know the parent of,
then it retries with GET_ANC.
Also added some debug to drs_base.py that developers can turn on to make
it easier to see what objects we're actually receiving in the
responses.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
This adds a new test to check that if objects are modified during a
replication, then those objects don't wind up missing from the
replication data.
Note that when this scenario occurs, samba returns the objects in a
different order to Windows. This test doesn't care what order the
replicated objects get returned in, so long as they all have been
received by the end of the test.
As part of this, I've refactored _check_replication() in drs_base.py so
it can be reused in new tests. In these cases, the objects are split up
over multiple different chunks. So asserting that the objects are returned
in a specific order makes it difficult to run the same test on both Samba
and Windows.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
Previously Samba would just drop cross-partition links where the link
target object is unknown. Instead, what we want to do is try to add the
forward link for the GUID specified. We can't add the backlink because
we don't know the target, however, dbcheck should be able to fix any
missing backlinks.
The new behaviour should now mean dbcheck will detect the problem and be
able to fix it. It's still not ideal, but it's better than dropping the
link completely.
I've updated the log so that it has higher severity and tells the user
what they need to do to fix it.
These changes now mean that the selftests now detect an error - instead
of completely dropping the serverReference, we now have a missing
backlink. I've updated the selftests to fix up any missing
serverReference backlinks before running dbcheck.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
We are going to end up supporting 2 different server schemes:
A. the old/default behaviour of sending all the linked attributes last,
at the end of the replication cycle.
B. the new/Microsoft way of sending the linked attributes interleaved
with the source/target objects.
Normally if we're talking to a server using the old scheme-A, we won't
ever use the GET_TGT flag. However, there are a couple of cases where
it can happen:
- A link to a new object was added during the replication cycle.
- An object was deleted while the replication was in progress (and
the linked attribute got queued before the object was deleted).
Talking to an Samba DC running the old scheme will just cause it to
start the replication cycle from scratch again, which is fairly
harmless. However, there is a chance that the same thing can happen
again, in which case the replication cycle will fail (because GET_TGT
was already set).
Even if we're using the new scheme (B), we could still potentially hit
this case, as we can still queue up linked attributes between requests
(group memberships can be larger than what can fit into a single
replication chunk).
If GET_TGT is set in the GetNcChanges request, then the local copy of
the target object should always be up-to-date when we process the linked
attribute. So if we still think the target object is deleted/recycled at
this point, then it's safe to ignore the linked attribute (because we
know our local copy is up-to-date). This logic matches the MS spec logic
in ProcessLinkValue().
Not failing the replication cycle may be beneficial if we're trying to
do a full-sync of a large database. Otherwise it might be time-consuming
and frustrating to repeat the sync unnecessarily.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
The server-side can potentially send the linked attribute before the
target-object. This happens on Microsoft, and will happen on Samba once
server-side GET_TGT support is added. In these cases there is a hole
where the Samba client can silently drop the linked attribute.
If the old copy of the target object was deleted/recycled, then the
client can receive the new linked attribute before it realizes the target
has now been reincarnated. It silently ignores the linked attribute,
thinking its receiving out of date information, when really it's the
client's copy of the target object that's out of date.
In this case we want to retry with the GET_TGT flag set, which will
force the updated version of the target object to be sent along with the
linked attribute. This deleted/recycled target case is the main reason
that Windows added the GET_TGT flag.
If the server sends all the links at the end, instead of along with the
source object, then this case can still be hit. If so, it will cause the
server to restart the replication from the beginning again. This is
probably preferential to silently dropping links.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
There was a bug in my previous patch where the code would verify
*all* links in the list, rather than just the ones that are new. And it
would do this for every replication chunk it received, regardless of
whether there were actually any links in that chunk.
The problem is by the time we want to verify the attributes, we don't
actually know which attributes are new. We can fix this by moving where
we store the linked attributes from the start of processing the
replication chunk to the end of processing the chunk. We can then verify
the new linked attributes at the same time we store them.
Longer-term we may want to try to apply the linked attribute at this
point. This would save looking up the source/target objects twice, but
it makes things a bit more complicated (attributes will usually apply at
this point *most* of the time, but not *all* the time).
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
Windows replication can send the linked attribute before it sends the
source object. The MS-DRSR spec says that in this case the client should
resend the GetNCChanges request with the GET_ANC flag set. In my testing
this resolves the problem - Windows will include the source object for the
linked attribute in the same replication chunk.
This problem doesn't happen with Samba-to-Samba replication, because the
source object for the linked attribute is guaranteed to have already been
sent.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
- Update IDL comments to include Microsoft reference doc
- Add support for sending v10 GetNCChanges request (needed for the
GET_TGT flag, which is in the new 'more_flags' field)
- Update to also set the GET_TGT flag in the same place we were setting
GET_ANC (I split this logic out into a separate function).
- The state struct now needs to hold a 'more_flags' field as well (this
flag is different to the GET_ANC replica flag)
Note that using the GET_TGT when replicating from a Windows DC could be
highly inefficient. Because Samba keeps the GET_TGT flag set throughout
the replication cycle, it will basically receive a repeated object from
Windows for every single linked attribute that it receives.
I believe Windows behaviour only expects the client to set the GET_TGT
flag when it actually needs to (i.e. when it receives a target object it
doesn't know about), rather than throughout the replication cycle.
However, this approach won't work with Samba-to-Samba replication,
because when the server receives the GET_TGT flag it restarts the
replication cycle from scratch. So if we only set the GET_TGT flag when
the client encountered an unknown target then Samba-to-Samba could
potentially get into an endless replication loop.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
Currently we only check that the target object is known at the end of
the transaction (i.e. the .prepare_commit hook). It's too late at this
point to resend the request with GET_TGT. Move this processing earlier
on, after we've applied all the objects (i.e. off the .extended hook).
In reality, we need to perform the checks at both points. I've
split the common code that gets the source/target details out of the
la_entry into a helper function. It's not the greatest function ever,
but seemed to make more sense than duplicating the code.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
If the DRS client received a linked attribute that it couldn't resolve
the target for, then it would just ignore that link and keep going. That
link would then be lost forever (although a full-sync would resolve
this). Instead of silently ignoring the link, fail the transaction.
This *can* happen on Samba, but it is unusual. The target object and
linked-attribute would need to be added while a replication is still in
progress. It can also happen fairly easily when talking to a Windows DC.
There are two import exceptions to this:
1). Linked attributes that span partitions. We can never guarantee that
we will have received the target object, because it may be in a partition
we haven't replicated yet. Samba doesn't have a great way of handling
this currently, but we shouldn't fail the replication (because that breaks
basic join tests). Just skip that linked attribute and hope that a
subsequent full-sync will fix it.
(I queried Microsoft and they said resolving cross-partition linked
attributes is a implementation-specific problem to solve. GET_TGT won't
resolve it)
2). When the replication involves a subset of objects, e.g.
critical-only. In these cases, we don't increase the highwater-mark, so
it is probably not such a dire problem if we don't add the link. In the
case of critical-only, we will do a subsequent full sync which will then
add the links.
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
We want to re-use this code to check that the linked attribute's target
object exists *before* we try to commit the transaction. This will allow
us to re-request the block with the GET_TGT flag set.
This splits checking the target object exists into a separate function.
Minor changes of note:
- the 'parent' argument was passed to replmd_process_linked_attribute()
as NULL, so I've just replaced where it was used in the refactored code
with NULL.
- I've tweaked the "Failed to find GUID" error message slightly to display
the attribute ID rather than the attribute name (saves repeating
lookups and/or passing extra arguments).
- Tweaked the replmd_deletion_state() logic - it only made sense to call
it in the code block where we actually found the target
Signed-off-by: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12972
Replace the shell subunit test for script/traffic_summary.pl with a
python black box test.
This involves moving the test files to more standard locations.
Signed-off-by: Gary Lockyer <gary@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Autobuild-User(master): Douglas Bagnall <dbagnall@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Aug 17 07:59:38 CEST 2017 on sn-devel-144
Scripts to generate representative network traffic and replay this to a
samba instance. For load testing, performance profiling and capacity
planning.
traffic_learner process a file generated by traffic_summary and
generate a model that can be used by traffic_replay to
generate samba network traffic.
traffic_replay Replay a summary file generated by traffic_summary, or
use a model created by traffic_learner to generate
network traffic.
Signed-off-by: Gary Lockyer <gary@catalyst.net.nz>
Signed-off-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Pair-programmed-with: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Pair-programmed-with: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
Pair-Programmed-With: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Pair-Programmed-With: Tim Beale <timbeale@catalyst.net.nz>
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Aug 17 00:53:48 CEST 2017 on sn-devel-144
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Wed Aug 16 04:11:47 CEST 2017 on sn-devel-144
This avoids casting another type of object to a void* and then to a SID
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
Autobuild-User(master): Garming Sam <garming@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Tue Aug 15 12:00:58 CEST 2017 on sn-devel-144
The use of SHA-1 has been on the "do not" list for a while now, so make our
self-signed certificates use SHA256 using the new
gnutls_x509_crt_sign2 provided since GNUTLS 1.2.0
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12953
Add support for dns wildcard records. i.e. if the following records
exist
exact.samba.example.com 3600 A 1.1.1.1
*.samba.example.com 3600 A 1.1.1.2
look up on exact.samba.example.com will return 1.1.1.1
look up on *.samba.example.com will return 1.1.1.2
look up on other.samba.example.com will return 1.1.1.2
Signed-off-by: Gary Lockyer <gary@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12952
Add checks for the maximum permitted length, maximum number of labels
and the maximum label length. These extra checks will be used by the
DNS wild card handling.
Signed-off-by: Gary Lockyer <gary@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12952
Add tests for dns wildcards.
Tests validated against Windows Server 2012 R2
Signed-off-by: Gary Lockyer <gary@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Garming Sam <garming@catalyst.net.nz>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12952
