[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0012209]: if the LDAP port is not 389, it's not possible to connect a LDAP server

[noreply at bugs.digium.com]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=12209 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                sylvain
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   12209
Category:                   Resources/res_config_ldap
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   major
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     new
Asterisk Version:           1.6.0-beta5 
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): 1.6.0 
SVN Revision (number only!): 108395 
Disclaimer on File?:        N/A 
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             03-14-2008 02:47 CDT
Last Modified:              03-14-2008 07:09 CDT
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    if the LDAP port  is not 389, it's not possible to
connect a LDAP server
Description: 
When the sentence "port" is given in the confiuration of
res_config_ldap.conf like here :
[_general]
host=linuxsde ; LDAP host(s)
port=10389      ;
protocol=3              ; Version of the LDAP protocol to use default is
3.
basedn=system   ; Base DN
pass=secret     ; Bind password
user=admin              ; Bind DN

asterisk try to connect to "l:103"
after code investigation, I think there's a bug. I give in additionnal
Information the patch which make it work for 1.6.0 branch
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 sylvain - 03-14-08 07:09  
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
/!\ The issue is ALSO solved using the patch attached on issue 0012211 /!\

it's because when I do a "svn diff" the two changes are provided. So only
the patch from 0012211 (if correct) should be integrated 

Issue History 
Date Modified   Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
03-14-08 07:09  sylvain        Note Added: 0083942                          
======================================================================