[undertow-dev] Authentication Mechanism Configuration

[Anil Saldhana]

On 11/25/2013 02:58 PM, Anil Saldhana wrote:
> On 11/25/2013 09:25 AM, Darran Lofthouse wrote:
>> I am in favour of both deployment specific approaches and subsystem
>> specific approaches - as you say we have two different audiences to make
>> use of this.
>>
>> Looking at your specific mechanism what level of configuration would you
>> require?
>>
>> If you have any complex requirement for the deployment specified
>> configuration could you follow a similar approach to Bill and use a
>> ServletExtension?
> The ServletExtension approach may work for my usecase for deployment level
> configuration. I will try it out.
>
> Is there an easy way to test the ServletExtension mechanism in Undertow
> via JUnit,
> without the use of WildFly? Not a deal breaker if there is none. :)
I am going to try the ServiceLoader.load() approach in JUnit.
>> Regards,
>> Darran Lofthouse.
>>
>>
>> On 25/11/13 15:19, Anil Saldhana wrote:
>>> On 11/25/2013 09:15 AM, Darran Lofthouse wrote:
>>>> On 25/11/13 15:11, Anil Saldhana wrote:
>>>>>> In my usecase, I want to install my custom authentication mechanism
>>>>>> irrespective of what is defined in web.xml
>>>> That is what I want to to be able to achieve on the subsystem side of
>>>> the configuration.
>>>>
>>>> I have lost count of the number of times I have seen users say, "I want
>>>> to take a single jar and deploy it to a development machine and a
>>>> production machine and have different security settings applied on each"
>>>> - with the subsystem side of the configuration this is something I want
>>>> to be able to achieve.
>>>>
>>>>>> This is done in JBossWeb by having an authenticator valve via
>>>>>> context.xml in the deployment.
>>>> Do you see the separate descriptor as a requirement or is that just how
>>>> we have done this before?
>>>>
>>> Two scenarios:
>>> a) You can just deploy a web archive with the descriptor and get the
>>> functionality.
>>> b) Configure at the subsystem level to apply the customization to
>>> selected set of web archives.
>>>
>>> The first scenario is useful for developers who are trying out WF. The
>>> second scenario is for devops.
>>>
>>> It may be better to support both.  Primarily we can recommend subsystem
>>> level configuration while
>>> supporting deployment level configuration also if desired.
>>>