The CAS2 protocol introduces a few things, one of which is proxy configuration (and another is an XML response). To see a detailed description of the protocol check out:
http://www.ja-sig.org/products/cas/overview/protocol/index.html Proxying is useful in a portal environment but it is also becoming increasingly important in any situation where a service needs to access another service on behalf of a user. This could include portlets, mail servers, or web services (RESTful or WS-*) Switching to the CAS2 protocol if you're not using proxying merely means that you're retrieving the response as an XML response. Again, see the Protocol document for more details. -Scott -Scott Battaglia PGP Public Key Id: 0x383733AA LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/scottbattaglia On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Alex Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > Thank you for your quick answer. > > I am kind of confused with the proxy authentication > > You mentioned CAS 2 is for proxy authentication. In my CAS 2 configuration, > I use Cas20ProxyReceivingTicketValidationFilter in my web.xml. You confirm > that I am in CAS 2 architecture. I want to know if I am using proxy > authentication when I use Cas20ProxyReceivingTicketValidationFilter in my > web.xml. > > Also, if I am not in a portal environment, how do you explain CAS 2 > benefits in a normal situation. For example, I have one or more than one > Tomcat servers and several applications in each server. > > How this differentiate CAS 1? > > > Thanks, > > Alex > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:11:26 -0500 > Subject: Re: CAS 1 and CAS 2 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] > > > CAS 1: Basic authentication; user requests service directly and receives it > CAS 2: Proxy authentication; service requests another service on behalf of > user and receives it > > An example where this is useful: your company / organization has a portal > that everyone logs in. If you expect the portal to deliver your email for > you, then it is requesting your email on behalf of you. If the email server > is CAS protected, then this would never work, so the portal must request > your email on your behalf. > > I wouldn't say proxy authentication is for a portal environment; it is > useful whenever you want build some manner of web service. > > On 8/11/08 5:10 PM, "Alex Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > Bother to bother all the experts. > > After I successfully configured both CAS 1 and CAS 2, I am still kind of > confused with the benefits by upgrading CAS 1 to CAS 2. > > It seems to me that there is no difference between CAS 1 and CAS 2 in the > front end. Using CAS 1 or using CAS 2 configuration can produce the same > output. If so, why bother to upgrade to CAS 2?? > > It seems to me that by distinguishing CAS 1 and CAS 2, it's just the > configuration difference and use most current version client, right?? > > It seems to me that CAS 1 is designed for SSO and CAS 2 is designed for a > portal environment, right? > > If you can tell me more about what the advantages/benefits/differences are > by upgrading CAS 1 to CAS 2, I will be very appreciated it > > Thanks, > > > Alex > > > > ------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Yale CAS mailing list > [email protected] > http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas > > > -- > Andrew R. Feller, Analyst > Information Technology Services > 200 Fred Frey Building > Louisiana State University > Baton Rouge, LA 70803 > (225) 578-3737 (Office) > (225) 578-6400 (Fax) > > _______________________________________________ > Yale CAS mailing list > [email protected] > http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas > >
_______________________________________________ Yale CAS mailing list [email protected] http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas
