[IP] unable to create user accounts

S2S-Robert

Verified User
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
415
Location
The Netherlands
I've put all my resellers on a specific ip (*.125) and now all those resellers are unable to create users due to the fact that there is nothing in the ip dropdown box. Last time I had this was because of the ip.list file not correctly set up, but I checked, and the ip is in the ip.list file.

Is the IP mentioned somewhere else or is assigned to someone which makes the IP's not show up?
 
Ok, I found the problem. The IP was somehow set to "Owned", which it's not. It's shared. This is however not the first time it suddenly became owned. Any thoughts on this one?

The second problem is that the value doesn't match the actual values. It says "Allround", I don't know if this is a feature or a bug?
 
Hello,

If an IP is free when it's assigned to a User, it will be owned. It has to be explicitly set to shared before adding Users to it if it's to be used for many Users.

Where is the word "Allround" stated? the word isn't written anywhere in the code...

John
 
Code:
gateway=
netmask=255.255.255.0
ns=
reseller=
status=shared
value=allround
Note that I changed the status from "owned" to shared, since it has many users on it.

I know it first has to be set shared before it is possible to use it, but the strange part is, and it's not the first time this occurred, is that somehow the ip is set to "owned".

As far as I know of, it's not possible to set the ip to "owned" if there are users residing on this ip. There are users on this ip and yet the status is set to owned somehow.

My best bet is that somehow this ip file is rewritten on whichever occasion and that somehow this state is set.
 
Ok.

"allround" is a User. When "allround" was being created, that IP (free at the time) was chosen, thus became owned.. To become owned the IP must first be Free. To be shared, it must first be free, set to shared, then assigned to Users.

If it were shared, "value" would be a number, not a name, and would increase for each additional user.

John
 
That's why I'm asking...

It used to be a number, then somehow it became the name.

So my guess is that somewhere a subroutine is called to set it to a name (Perhaps if a reseller decides to set it to a specific user?) and in that subroutine there somehow is not check or something?
 
Hmm.

Ok..looking at the code.. the only place it gets set to "owned" is when a User is created.

Check the /var/log/directadmin/error.log for the following:
Code:
IP::addToIP::adding owner to already owned ip
If you find it, look for the very first instance of it. Then cross check the time of that log entry with the system.log for the User that was created.. maybe that will shed some light.

John
 
Ok, I think I figured it out. My best bet is that when the control panel checks to see if it's owned it looks at the ip file and saw there was no owner. I deleted the word "admin" from the list to make sure resellers didn't have a problem with the fact that the IP was actually not owned by them. The server IP doesn't have an owner either, so I thought that it wouldn't be a problem. I guess it is a problem if the ip is not the main server IP.

This came up during the cross check when I saw that the error time didn't match the user creation time. So the control panel might have checked to see if it's owned, but then decided it wasn't since there was no reseller attached to it. I guess it didn't see that the IP was actually set to "shared", so it mustn't be owned.

I do however have a recommendation, which is, that the control panel shouldn't just check for a reseller name, but also check to see if the status of the IP is set to "shared" at the same time. If the status is set to shared then it shouldn't be possible to assign a user to it.
 
Back
Top