Uncertain behaviour in calendar service for moved users

Question

Hi freinds,
I transferred users from old version 6.2 to new version 7u3 using ldap export-import. All users are capable of accessing thier mail interface through convergence.
Those users were not configured for calendar service in the previous msg instance and calendar service was not installed. Then I added new service pkg (earth) with calendar server facility to a one of transferred domain and then add this service pkg to a user in this domain. Although service pkg assignment get success there is an uncertain behaviour of setting attributes for each user.
For some users following two attributes ( Viewable through new DA )are set properly while for others it is not set at all. For "test01" user convergence does not show the calendar interface properly after pressing the "calendar" button. But for user "test04" the calendar interface is shown with all featuers.
For "test01" user
Owned Calendar:
Subscribed Calendar:
For "test04" user
Owned Calendar: [email protected]$test04 testing
Subscribed Calendar: [email protected]$test04 testing
Since I am doing a test for confirming possibility of getting calendar service enabled for old users
I did not remove unnecessary LDAP attributes from the exported ldif files.
Can somebody explain the reason for such an uncertainty.
Thanks

Answer 1

Hi shane,
Thanks for the reply. pls find my answers and observations below. Appreciate your intervention.
Q. What version of Delegated Administrator-DA are you using? Are you using Direct LDAP or Access Manager mode?
A. This is a test for a large scale user migration from old msg server 6.2 (2005Q1)/ DS 5.2 to new commsuite ver 7u3
The old system used Delegated administrator integrated in to AM 6 2005Q1. The new delegated administartor is ver 7.
( Direct LDAP connection is configured with out AM installed)
Q. How were the "old" users provisioned -- which tool?
A. Some users belongs to virtual domains were added through DA. Other users were added directly to LDAP using a customised
tool.
Q.Were the test01 and test04 accounts both from the "old" environment?
A. Yes they both were created using old version DA. When do a ldap search both have same kind of attributes in the old system.
Q. Does an account exist for the test01 user in the calendar database e.g.
A. Yes. For both test01 and test04 accounts exist and they are enabled
Q. What are the "ics" parameters for the test01 and test04 accounts set to e.g.
A.
bash-3.00# ./ldapsearch -D "cn=directory manager" -w password -b "o=example.com,o=isp" uid=test01 | grep -i ics
objectClass: icscalendaruser
icsFirstDay: 2
icsTimezone: Asia/Calcutta
icsDWPHost: newmail.example.com
icsStatus: active
icsCalendar: [email protected]
bash-3.00# ./ldapsearch -D "cn=directory manager" -w password -b "o=example.com,o=isp" uid=test04 | grep -i ics
objectClass: icscalendaruser
icsStatus: active
icsCalendar: [email protected]
icsTimezone: Asia/Calcutta
icsFirstDay: 2
icsSubscribed: [email protected]$test04 testing--->A
icsDWPHost: newmail.example.com
icsCalendarOwned: [email protected]$test04 testing--->B
bash-3.00#
Note : pls look at the attributes I marked as A and B. I observed they added in to the user entry after the user
logged in to convergence interface and click on the "calendar" button.For test04 these attributes were added. But
for test01 it was not!
Q. What do you define as "unnecessary LDAP attributes"?
A. In the entries I impored from the old version there are some attributes that are not defined in the new DS ver 6.3.
I did a diff check between a new user entry created in the new system and a user entry imported from the old system.
My aim is to find exact attributes needed per a user entry to make calendar service/IM service up and then add these
attributes to each user imported from old system using an automated script.I think I do not need to rectify above problem
at the DA level. After I found the list of necessary LDAP attributes for the task I can add them manually to one of
old user entry and test it. Is that a recommended way of doing it?
Regards,