Matt . wrote:
> The right way to sequest a SAN, this seems to need some extra config file ?

Like I said before, use certmonger, it makes life easier.

I'll create a new host balancer.example.com with a HTTP service. I'll
generate a cert with a SAN for idp.example.com in that service. I'm
generating the cert on idp.example.com, hence the service-add-host bit.

On 4.1 (freeipa-server-4.1.3-2.fc22.x86_64)

# kinit admin
# ipa host-add balancer.example.com
# ipa service-add HTTP/balancer.example.com --force
# ipa service-add-host --hosts=idp.example.com HTTP/balancer.example.com
# ipa-getcert request -f /etc/pki/tls/certs/balancer.pem -k
/etc/pki/tls/private/balancer.key -N CN=balancer.example.com -K
HTTP/balancer.example.com -D idp.example.com
# getcert list -i <id> until it goes to MONITORING
# openssl x509 -text -in /etc/pki/tls/certs/balancer.pem
Certificate:
    Data:
        Version: 3 (0x2)
        Serial Number: 11 (0xb)
    Signature Algorithm: sha256WithRSAEncryption
        Issuer: O=EXAMPLE.COM, CN=Certificate Authority
        Validity
            Not Before: Mar 20 14:29:33 2015 GMT
            Not After : Mar 20 14:29:33 2017 GMT
        Subject: O=EXAMPLE.COM, CN=balancer.example.com
[SNIP]
        X509v3 extensions:
[SNIP]
            X509v3 Subject Alternative Name:
                DNS:idp.example.com, othername:<unsupported>,
othername:<unsupported>
[SNIP]

SAN was definitely not supported in 3.0. Not sure about 3.3, should work
in 4.0+.

rob

> 
> 2015-03-19 15:04 GMT+01:00 Rob Crittenden <rcrit...@redhat.com>:
>> Matt . wrote:
>>> Isn't this documented well (yet) ?
>>
>> Is what documented yet?
>>
>> rob
>>
>>>
>>> The RH docs are always very detailed about it, but I'm not sure
>>> here... I see solutions but not 100% from A to Z to make sure we do it
>>> the proper way.
>>>
>>> 2015-03-12 16:59 GMT+01:00 Matt . <yamakasi....@gmail.com>:
>>>> Not worried, I need to try.
>>>>
>>>> I think it's not an issue as we use persistance for the connection. We
>>>> only do some user adding/chaging stuff, nothing really fancy but it
>>>> needs to be decent. As persistence comes in I think we don't have to
>>>> worry about it, we discussed that here earlier as I remember.
>>>>
>>>> Or do I ?
>>>>
>>>> Something else; did you had a nice PTO ?
>>>>
>>>> 2015-03-12 15:54 GMT+01:00 Rob Crittenden <rcrit...@redhat.com>:
>>>>> Matt . wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Security wise I can understand that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes I have read about that... but that would let me use the
>>>>>> loadbalancer to connect ? I was not sure if the SAN would "connect" as
>>>>>> "other" host.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kerberos through a load balancer can be a problem. Is this what you're
>>>>> worried about?
>>>>>
>>>>> rob
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2015-03-12 15:07 GMT+01:00 Rob Crittenden <rcrit...@redhat.com>:
>>>>>>> Matt . wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Guys,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is Rob able to look at this ? I hope he has some sparetime as I'm
>>>>>>>> kinda stuck with this issue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wildcard certs are not supported.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can request a SAN with certmonger using -D <FQDN>. That will work
>>>>>>> with IPA 4.x for sure, maybe 3.3.5.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> rob
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2015-03-08 12:30 GMT+01:00 Matt . <yamakasi....@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>> I'm reviewing some things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When I'm using a loadbalancer, which I prefer in this setup I need to
>>>>>>>>> have the same certificates on both servers. Maybe a wildcard for my
>>>>>>>>> domain could do instead of having only both fqdn's of the servers
>>>>>>>>> including the loadbalancer's fqdn.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But the question remains, how?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2015-03-07 10:37 GMT+01:00 Matt . <yamakasi....@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I will balance with IP persistance so I think there won't be any
>>>>>>>>>> mixing as long as that "used" server is online.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2015-03-06 19:16 GMT+01:00 Dmitri Pal <d...@redhat.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/06/2015 11:05 AM, Matt . wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> OK, understood.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But when a webservice does execute a command (from scripting) to a 
>>>>>>>>>>>> SVR
>>>>>>>>>>>> record and the first is not reacable, would it try to do it again 
>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>> will handle DNS this in front of it ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I do a kinit against an IPA server using a keytab after I first
>>>>>>>>>>>> checked if the user was able to auth himself using his ldap
>>>>>>>>>>>> credentials, if so, this kinit exec is fired and I do some CURL 
>>>>>>>>>>>> stuff
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the IPA server.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> That's why I wanted a loadbalancer, the loadbalancer sees if a 
>>>>>>>>>>>> server
>>>>>>>>>>>> is down and doesn't even try to direct any of the commands to it...
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure if the SRV will handle this well when doing these 
>>>>>>>>>>>> command
>>>>>>>>>>>> from PHP for an example. Building in extra checks in front could be
>>>>>>>>>>>> done but it not ideal as a loadbalancer can handle such things much
>>>>>>>>>>>> better.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> OK, this makes things much more clear. Thanks for the explanation.
>>>>>>>>>>> Rob. What is our failover logic for API?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> For CLI we use a negotiation and then we store a cookie so as long 
>>>>>>>>>>> as the
>>>>>>>>>>> whole conversation goes to the same server you should be fine. I do 
>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>> think you need to re-encrypt the traffic at load balancer and thus 
>>>>>>>>>>> have a
>>>>>>>>>>> cert there then if you can enforce the use of the same server in 
>>>>>>>>>>> this case.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The issue I anticipate is with Kerberos. I think you should not 
>>>>>>>>>>> load balance
>>>>>>>>>>> the Kerberos traffic, only the API commands starting with the 
>>>>>>>>>>> negotiation.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Rob does that make sense for you?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2015-03-06 16:41 GMT+01:00 Dmitri Pal <d...@redhat.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/06/2015 10:24 AM, Matt . wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm really bound to a loadbalancer, as it's HA setup of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> loadbalancers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SRV won't fit here sorry to say.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I auth users, so their keytab should be the same between two 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> masters I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Each entity in Kerberos exchange has its own identity and key.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you send a ticket that is destined to service A instead to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> service B
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not work unless they share the same keys and identity. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sharinf same
>>>>>>>>>>>>> keys and identities between the servers just would not work with 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IPA.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Keep in mind that IPA clients and server need to work and fail 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> over if
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> do not have any load balancers and this is the common case. You 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> trying
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to add one where it is really not needed creating overhead for 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In that case... I need to add the altnames to the certs, but I'm 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 100% there in step 6
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks again!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthijs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2015-03-06 16:16 GMT+01:00 Petr Spacek <pspa...@redhat.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6.3.2015 15:39, Matt . wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have 2 IPA servers where I kinit to and post to the api using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> curl/json.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we are talking purely about scripting, you can use IPA 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Python API.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handle fail over for you even without any load balancer. That 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> easiest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I need redundancy and don't want to have it script managed, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> central point where I can tal to I use a loadbalancer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, if you can control clients then the easiest and most 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> universal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use DNS SRV records and add failover logic to clients. That 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> solution
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> works
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even when servers are geographically distributed/in different 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> networks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does not have single point of failure (the load balancer).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I connect to the loadbalancer using DNAT, so the client IP 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is known
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the IPA server because this is needed for the http service
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> principals I need to add the loadbalancer hostname to my IPA 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and make it as an ALT name to it's Certificate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As the users are the same on both servers I would asume i can 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keytab for a user against both servers from my clients.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm talking about keytabs on the FreeIPA servers - services 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IPA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server have their own keytabs too. Every service on every 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keytab with different key.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You need to talk with Simo or some other Kerberos guru about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibility
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sharing keytabs between IPA services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does this make it more clear ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm still not sure if you want to have human users too or just 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> API
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clients.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Petr^2 Spacek
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2015-03-06 15:31 GMT+01:00 Petr Spacek <pspa...@redhat.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6.3.2015 15:13, Matt . wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But as the user is the same, I could use the same keytab for 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ipa
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I need to use the API indeed, so need to issue the http 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> service.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any other options ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not really understand your use case. Could you describe 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> detail, please?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Petr^2 Spacek
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2015-03-06 14:24 GMT+01:00 Petr Spacek <pspa...@redhat.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6.3.2015 14:08, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm figuring out how to regenerate the webserver 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> certificates so I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use a loadbalancer in front of my ipa servers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you talking about FreeIPA web interface? It is 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> technically
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible to use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> load-balancer but it will be really hacky. You would have 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to solve
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> certificates and also distribute shared keytabs and so on.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would recommend you to use "something" which issues HTTP 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> redirect
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to ipa
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server 1/2/3/4/5 according to current state instead of using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> classical load
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> balancer on the network level. Normal HTTP redirect will 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not force
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you to mess
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with certs and keytabs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Petr^2 Spacek
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Petr Spacek  @  Red Hat
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitri Pal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sr. Engineering Manager IdM portfolio
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Red Hat, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-users mailing list:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-users
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Go to http://freeipa.org for more info on the project
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitri Pal
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sr. Engineering Manager IdM portfolio
>>>>>>>>>>> Red Hat, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-users mailing list:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-users
>>>>>>>>>>> Go to http://freeipa.org for more info on the project
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>

-- 
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-users mailing list:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-users
Go to http://freeipa.org for more info on the project

Reply via email to