Hi Michael,

> On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 02:30:33PM +1000, Michael Mansour wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > > Greetings.  We're trying to install the free version of Zimbra on a SL
> > > 5.0 system (i386).  Most of the installation goes smoothly, but 
> > > toward the end we have a problem with a failure to initialize LDAP.  
> > > If we omit SL's version of LDAP (Zimbra has its own), we get a 
> > > failure to connect to port 389.  If we run the SL version of LDAP 
> > 
> > Have you checked that your server is listening on port 389?
> > 
> > Have you tried connecting to port 389?
> > 
> > Do you know if Zimbra's own LDAP is started and listening on port 389?
> > 
> > Shutting down openldap from SL5 means (to me) you'd need to start another ldap
> > server (zimbra's) before it will connect. You cannot have two services
> > listening on the same at the same time.
> 
> Hi, Michael.  Yes, I have tried connecting to port 389 (telnet localhost
> 389), and, indeed, there is no response, unless I've started SL's 
> ldap server.  Also, I would assume that Zimbra's ldap server is NOT 
> started, as I get the complaint DURING the installation of Zimbra. 
>  There seems to be a Catch 22 here.

Yeah. I haven't ever installed Zimbra myself so not familiar with the process,
but it would seem odd to me that Zimbra would force a connection to it's own
LDAP server without first starting it up itself.

Personally, I'd likely pull LDAP away from the local Zimbra server and have
directory services remotely (and clustered). That's one of the beauties of
LDAP. But if you're using an LDAP server that's not Zimbra's, I'd also imagine
you'd have schema problems which may be hard to resolve.

> > > (shouldn't be necessary, AFAIK), the Zimbra setup script connects to 
> > > port 389 but complains that TLS is an unsupported option.
> > 
> > Then just recompile the openldap that comes with SL (recreate the RPM if you
> > like - src.rpm's are readily available) and turn of TLS. Then start openldap
> > and that error will go away - possibly being replaced by another one :)
> 
> Heh.  That's certainly something I don't want to have to do.  I.e., I
> don't think it would be particularly difficult, but it introduces
> another support headache that I don't need.  And I really can't believe
> that it SHOULD be necessary to jump through those kinds of hoops to get
> this product installed.

I agree.

> > > If you have any suggestions, please send 'em to me.  Thanks.
> > 
> > I personally wouldn't go the route you're going when using SL5. I'd personally
> > look for a Xen VM (appliance) of Zimbra (I'm pretty sure there's one out
> > there), load into as a Virtual machine and then spend my time on Zimbra config
> > instead of setup. That's one of the major reasons to go to SL5 and setup time
> > reduction is one of the major reasons for VM appliances.
> 
> I agree that a VM instance of Zimbra looks appealing.  OTOH:
> 
>     (a) The set-up is SUPPOSED to consist of no more than typing:
> 
>             ./install.sh
> 
>     (b) The stuff I'm doing at the moment is just proof (or disproof,
>  as        the case may be) of principle.
> 
> When/if I get this working on the ancient PIII machine in my office,
> I'll look into virtualizing it.

Do Zimbra have support/mailing lists/forums available? maybe those guys can
help more?

Good luck mate. 

Michael.

> Thanks.
> 
> 					- Mike
> -- 
> Michael Hannon            mailto:[log in to unmask]
> Dept. of Physics          530.752.4966
> University of California  530.752.4717 FAX
> Davis, CA 95616-8677
------- End of Original Message -------