That sounds like an excellent idea.

D.

On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 8:01 PM, Vladimir Ivanov <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just would like to inform you that I made inactive other types of
> authentication (I added hidden input field to 'upw_login_form' template via
> CSS selector that holds true/false value depending on whether LDAP is
> enabled, replaced login form action URL so that username/password go to LDAP
> module, hid open ldap id input field and signup button) when LDAP is enabled
> in 'default.props' file. What do you think if it's applicable solution?
>
> I also externalized role list that are allowed to access app to
> default.props file (roles are separated by comma).
>
> Vladimir
>
>
>
> 2011/4/25 Richard Hirsch <[email protected]>
>
>> You could try it against the Apache LDAP - I posted details in a recent
>> thread
>>
>> D.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 7:41 PM, Ethan Jewett <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Hi Vladimir,
>> >
>> > Perfect, I didn't see that in there. Now I just need to track down an
>> LDAP
>> > server to test against :-)
>> >
>> > Ethan
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Vladimir Ivanov <[email protected]
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ethan,
>> >>
>> >> I agree, most probably only one authentication method at a time will be
>> >> used. I think 'ldap.enabled' property in default.props file suits our
>> need.
>> >>
>> >> Vladimir
>> >>
>> >> 2011/4/25 Ethan Jewett <[email protected]>
>> >>
>> >> > Hi Vladimir,
>> >> >
>> >> > Cool! My impression is that this will be something the administrator
>> >> > decides
>> >> > and either all users will log in via LDAP or none of them will. So I
>> >> think
>> >> > it should be set in a property/configuration file and the UI should
>> >> remain
>> >> > the same (though the OpenID option should go away if we are using
>> LDAP).
>> >> >
>> >> > What do you think? Are there scenarios in which a deployment would
>> want
>> >> > some
>> >> > users logging in using the local accounts and some using LDAP? If so,
>> >> then
>> >> > my way isn't going to work.
>> >> >
>> >> > Cheers,
>> >> > Ethan
>> >> >
>> >> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Vladimir Ivanov <
>> [email protected]
>> >> > >wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Hi Ethan!
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Yes, you are absolutely right. I haven't decided yet which way
>> should
>> >> > users
>> >> > > specify on UI that they want to authenticate via LDAP. I've added
>> >> > checkbox
>> >> > > on login page (corresponding files are attached to the issue) so
>> it's
>> >> > > possible to test it, but haven't committed these changes (not all
>> users
>> >> > > will
>> >> > > use LDAP at the end). What do you think, checkbox is acceptable
>> >> solution?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Vladimir
>> >> > >
>> >> > > 2011/4/25 Ethan Jewett <[email protected]>
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > Hi Vladimir,
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > This looks really nice. It basically means that we can hook ESME
>> up
>> >> to
>> >> > an
>> >> > > > LDAP server via properties and then users can log in via the
>> normal
>> >> > > > web-based UI using their LDAP credentials, right?
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Ethan
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 2:28 AM, Vladimir Ivanov <
>> >> > [email protected]
>> >> > > > >wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > Hi Richard,
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > I've just resolved ESME-135. It would be nice if you or other
>> guys
>> >> > > check
>> >> > > > > and
>> >> > > > > test it.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Vladimir
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > 2011/4/15 Richard Hirsch <[email protected]>
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > > @Vladimir  - do you want to write another blog about direct
>> >> > > > > > authentication via LDAP? Are other configuration / code
>> changes
>> >> > > > > > necessary?
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > D.
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Vladimir Ivanov <
>> >> > > > [email protected]>
>> >> > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > I think we can close ESME-214. Concerning ESME-135 - IMHO it
>> >> also
>> >> > > can
>> >> > > > > be
>> >> > > > > > > closed if direct authentication via LDAP (without
>> >> > container-managed
>> >> > > > > > > authentication) isn't needed.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > Vladimir
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > 2011/4/14 Richard Hirsch <[email protected]>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >> Can we close
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> ESME-135         Add LDAP to ESME
>> >> > > > > > >> ESME-214         Add container-based authentication
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> D.
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > --
>> >> > > > > > > Best Regards,
>> >> > > > > > > Vladimir Ivanov
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > --
>> >> > > > > Best Regards,
>> >> > > > > Vladimir Ivanov
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Best Regards,
>> >> > > Vladimir Ivanov
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Best Regards,
>> >> Vladimir Ivanov
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Vladimir Ivanov
>

Reply via email to