[Freeipa-devel] [PATCHES] 94-99 Read and use per-service PAC type

[Sumit Bose]

On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 08:33:51AM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/28/2013 03:28 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 13:02 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >> On 02/28/2013 12:42 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 08:44:35AM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >>>> On 02/27/2013 06:48 PM, Sumit Bose wrote:
> > 
> >>>> Hi Sumit,
> >>>>
> >>>> This looks like a good idea and would prevent the magic default PAC type, yes.
> >>>> Though I would not add this service-specific setting to global IPA config object.
> >>>>
> >>>> I would rather like to see that in the service tree, for example as a
> >>>> configuration option of the service root which could be controlled with
> >>>> serviceconfig-* commands (we already have dnsconfig, trustconfig), e.g:
> >>>>
> >>>> # ipa serviceconfig-add-pacmap --service=nfs --pac-type=NONE
> >>>> # ipa serviceconfig-add-pacmap --service=cifs --pac-type=PAD
> >>>> # ipa serviceconfig-show
> >>>>   Default PAC Map: nfs:NONE, cifs:PAD
> >>>
> >>> Are you thinking of having this in addition to the for-all-services
> >>> default values in cn=ipaConfig,cn=etc or shall those be dropped? I don't
> >>> like the first case because then three different objects needs to be
> >>> consulted to find out which is the right type. This wouldn't be an issue
> >>> for the plugin, but I think it is hard for the user/admin to follow.
> >>
> >> Hm, you are right.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> If the current defaults shall be dropped I think this is a major change
> >>> because it will require changes in the current CLI and WebUI which will
> >>> be visible to the users. I'm not against this change, I'm just wondering
> >>> if it is worth the effort for the next release?
> >>>
> >>> Maybe an argument to keep this is in global default is that the settings
> >>> are used for the host/*.* services as well which are in a different
> >>> sub-tree of the cn=accounts container. Additionally in future we might
> >>> want apply those setting to the user TGTs as well?
> >>
> >> Yeah, that was actually my point. That we are mixing service-specific PAC
> >> "rules" to the global setting. Which may be shared with host/*.* principals and
> >> user principals. This automatic PAC rules may require some designing so that is
> >> is generally usable.
> > 
> > I think putting everything in the general config is more understandable
> > and discoverable. These per-service defaults are basically exceptions to
> > the general rule so it make sense to keep everything together.
> > 
> > Simo.
> > 
> 
> Ok, if these are really just an exceptions to the general rule (and there will
> not be too many of them), I think we can leave it in config entry. But if we
> expect to have exceptions for other types of entries (hosts, users), I think we
> should rather use something like "service:nfs:NONE" do distinguish this exception.
> 
> Question is, do we want to implement the interface and processing for that in
> current Sumit's patches or do we use that is they are?

I would like to update the patches so that they can handle the
service:TYPE style entry and replace the current update code with just
adding nfs:NONE to the global options. I will update the design page
accordingly, too.

I would prefer if the enhancements needed for the CLI and WebUI can be
covered by other/new tickets, but I'm happy to add the needed
information to the design page too.

bye,
Sumit

> 
> Martin