Re: [Pulp-dev] authentication proposal for 3.0

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > Thanks for the reply. A few questions inline. > > On 09/20/2016 01:32 PM, Michael Hrivnak wrote: > >> Great questions. >> >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Brian Bouterse > > wrote: >> >> >> 1. To recap wh

Re: [Pulp-dev] authentication proposal for 3.0

Thanks for the reply. A few questions inline. On 09/20/2016 01:32 PM, Michael Hrivnak wrote: Great questions. On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Brian Bouterse mailto:bbout...@redhat.com>> wrote: 1. To recap what SSL users should transition onto... For a use case where a user wants to

Re: [Pulp-dev] authentication proposal for 3.0

Great questions. On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > > > 1. To recap what SSL users should transition onto... For a use case where > a user wants to place a file on a system and that system or a user who can > access that file can use that as their credential (like SSL did f

Re: [Pulp-dev] authentication proposal for 3.0

This plan looks really great. Thank you both for getting this effort going! I have a couple of questions/ideas. If you want these on the ticket instead just let me know. 1. To recap what SSL users should transition onto... For a use case where a user wants to place a file on a system and that

Re: [Pulp-dev] authentication proposal for 3.0

As an AD/SSSD user (mod_auth_gssapi); I like where this is going. Thank you for proposing a path that continues to use Apache REMOTE_USER, and we very much look forward to being able to use AD groups and auto-creation. - Kodiak ___ Pulp-dev mailing lis

[Pulp-dev] authentication proposal for 3.0

Tanya and I have been evaluating authentication use cases against available solutions for Pulp 3. This email includes a summary of the goals we identified, based input from numerous stakeholders, and a working proposal for a set of technologies we can use to achieve them. Please provide feedback, a