Univention Bugzilla – Bug 39864
Multiple IP addresses -> multiple host entries
Last modified: 2017-03-29 10:38:48 CEST
UCS-4.1 - Create a "host" entry in a forward zone with "multiple IPv4" addresses. - The table then shows 2 entries With an invalid IPv6 address (2001:4dd0:dd00:8c42:ff17:0011:2233<del>:4455</del>) added, an "Notification" is shown about validation failing: | The following properties could not be validated: | IP addresses: | * | * | * Not a valid IP address! # univention-ldapsearch -LLL relativeDomainName=host dn: relativeDomainName=host,zoneName=phahn.test,cn=dns,dc=phahn,dc=pt aRecord: 10.201.17.1 aRecord: 10.201.17.2 objectClass: top objectClass: dNSZone objectClass: univentionObject univentionObjectType: dns/host_record mXRecord: 10 dc1.phahn.pt dNSTTL: 10800 tXTRecord: Test1 tXTRecord: Text 2 relativeDomainName: host zoneName: phahn.test aAAARecord: 2001:4dd0:dd00:8c42:ff17:0011:2233:4455
The problem of this bug is the appearance of the error message?
udm dns/host_record create --superordinate "zoneName=$(ucr get domainname),cn=dns,$(ucr get ldap/base)" --set name=host --append a=10.201.17.1 --append a=10.201.17.2 --append a=2001:4dd0:dd00:8c42:ff17:0011:2233 --set mx="10 $(hostname -f)" --append txt=Test1 --append txt="Text 2" E: Invalid Syntax: a: Not a valid IP address! Object created: relativeDomainName=host,zoneName=pt42.intranet,cn=dns,dc=pt42,dc=intranet (In reply to Philipp Hahn from comment #0) > UCS-4.1 > - Create a "host" entry in a forward zone with "multiple IPv4" addresses. > - The table then shows 2 entries The duplicate entries issue is Bug #44078 > With an invalid IPv6 address > (2001:4dd0:dd00:8c42:ff17:0011:2233<del>:4455</del>) added, an > "Notification" is shown about validation failing: > | The following properties could not be validated: > | IP addresses: > | * > | * > | * Not a valid IP address! That probably is the annoying behavior of udm-cli to ignore errors and warnings, like mis-spelled properties: > # udm ... create --set foo=bar > WARNING: No attribute with name 'foo' in this module, value not set. I created Bug #44123 for this. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 44078 ***