Hi Matt,

What about just using a database that both are pointing at? Thats what we are 
currently using in our cluster. 

cheers,
Steve



On 17/08/2011, at 5:26 PM, Kirk, Matt wrote:

> John,
> 
> My understanding is that the DefaultTicketRegistry is not replicated across a 
> CAS Cluster, therefore when a user authenticates for a given service and 
> presents the Service Ticket to the service, that service may well (probably 
> almost certainly) visit a different node in the cluster (via a load balancer) 
> when validating that ticket.  If the ST details are not replicated across all 
> nodes then the ticket validation will fail and the user will be denied access 
> to the service they have just authenticated for.  By using a distributed 
> Ehcache for the ticket registry, all nodes will be made aware of all tickets, 
> thus allowing ticket validation to take place on any node in the cluster.
> 
> Unless of course I have missed something too!
> 
> Cheers,
> Matt
> 
> 
> From: Ourada, John [[email protected]]
> Sent: 16 August 2011 16:17
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [cas-user] CAS in load balanced environment
> 
> Matt, based on what I have read on the JASIG site, I agree with you.
>  
> Part of the requirements given to me was to not have a user re-authenticate 
> if part of the cluster fails.  Memcache was eliminated.  Using a DB involved 
> too many groups within IS and increased cost.
>  
> I am curious why you are choosing the EHCache ticket registry over 
> DefaultTicketRegistry.  Am I missing something?
>  
> -john
>  
> From: Kirk, Matt [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 10:05 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [cas-user] CAS in load balanced environment
>  
> Thanks for all the feedback.
> 
> We're opting for the distributed Ehcache ticket registry over a database 
> persistent registry across a CAS Cluster as we feel that if a node goes down, 
> then the ticket replication will allow seamless access to services and 
> therefore the DB is not required (and would itself be a single point of 
> failure unless replicated in some fashion).  The failed node can then be 
> re-started and rejoin the cluster and be re-populated with the current 
> tickets via the distributed Ehcache.  
> 
> If the entire cluster were to go down it would require users to 
> re-authenticate but we consider this a (hopefully) rare and fatal system 
> failure so forcing users to re-authenticate after system re-start is 
> acceptable.  
> 
> This approach removes the need for a database and all the cost / admin etc 
> that goes with it.  
> 
> Do you think is is a reasonable solution?  Have I missed something which may 
> change my thoughts?
> 
> Thanks,
> Matt
> 
> 
> From: Scott Battaglia [[email protected]]
> Sent: 16 August 2011 14:55
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [cas-user] CAS in load balanced environment
> 
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Marvin Addison <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> > what is the Memcache solution and do you have a setup guide?
> 
> See https://wiki.jasig.org/display/CASUM/MemcacheTicketRegistry.  I'll
> discuss briefly what's _not_ in the manual.  I think there's some
> misinformation in the community, borne out in list discussions and
> other venues, about the need for the repcache patches to memcached for
> clustering.  I think repcache is absolutely unnecessary based on the
> failure mode of memcached.  Consider a memcached cluster of 3 nodes,
> all noted in the CAS configuration.  The Java memcached client will
> calculate a key and store it on one node.  If that node goes down, the
> client will attempt to retrieve the key from the dead node and fail,
> returning an empty value.  That will appear to CAS and ultimately the
> user that he or she is unauthenticated and will simply need to
> reauthenticate.  Upon reauthentication the client will know that there
> are only two nodes remaining, and calculate a new key that will be
> stored on one of the two available nodes and proceed as normal.  That
> is a _very_ graceful failure mode in my opinion, and there's no need
> for anything additional like repcached.
>  
> It really depends on your needs.  You may feel that its acceptable to force 
> them to log back in if a node goes down, others may not.  This is why we have 
> a number of these backing mechanisms, you find the one that matches your 
> expertise and meets your availability requirements.  
>  
> However, as you note, using repcached is optional, and just provides an extra 
> level of redundancy if you want to apply the patch. (we did at Rutgers)
>  
> Cheers,
> Scott
>  
>  
> 
> > Is one solution favourable over another?
> 
> Most folks choose based on experience with a particular technology.
> We use JpaTicketRegistry on PostgreSQL in production, but I'd be happy
> to switch to memcached if needed.  I personally think Terracotta,
> JBossCache, and Infinispan are interesting technologies that are
> overkill for CAS.  The complexity is not worth the benefits.  That is
> absolutely a personal opinion and lots of folks would disagree.
> 
> M
> 
> --
> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-user
> 
>  
> -- 
> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-user
> 
> Information in this email including any attachments may be privileged, 
> confidential and is intended exclusively for the addressee. The views 
> expressed may not be official policy, but the personal views of the 
> originator. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by 
> return e-mail and delete it from your system. You should not reproduce, 
> distribute, store, retransmit, use or disclose its contents to anyone. Please 
> note we reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communication through our 
> internal and external networks. SKY and the SKY marks are trade marks of 
> British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and are used under licence. British Sky 
> Broadcasting Limited (Registration No. 2906991), Sky Interactive Limited 
> (Registration No. 3554332), Sky-In-Home Service Limited (Registration No. 
> 2067075) and Sky Subscribers Services Limited (Registration No. 2340150) are 
> direct or indirect subsidiaries of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc 
> (Registration No. 2247735). All of the companies mentioned in this paragraph 
> are incorporated in England and Wales and share the same registered office at 
> Grant Way, Isleworth, Middlesex TW7 5QD.
> -- 
> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-user
> -- 
> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-user
> 
> Information in this email including any attachments may be privileged, 
> confidential and is intended exclusively for the addressee. The views 
> expressed may not be official policy, but the personal views of the 
> originator. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by 
> return e-mail and delete it from your system. You should not reproduce, 
> distribute, store, retransmit, use or disclose its contents to anyone. Please 
> note we reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communication through our 
> internal and external networks. SKY and the SKY marks are trade marks of 
> British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and are used under licence. British Sky 
> Broadcasting Limited (Registration No. 2906991), Sky Interactive Limited 
> (Registration No. 3554332), Sky-In-Home Service Limited (Registration No. 
> 2067075) and Sky Subscribers Services Limited (Registration No. 2340150) are 
> direct or indirect subsidiaries of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc 
> (Registration No. 2247735). All of the companies mentioned in this paragraph 
> are incorporated in England and Wales and share the same registered office at 
> Grant Way, Isleworth, Middlesex TW7 5QD.
> -- 
> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-user


-- 
You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-user

Reply via email to