[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: On backporting r21531 to 1.4.x.

From: Vladimir Berezniker <vmpn_at_hitechman.com>
Date: 2006-10-12 16:14:03 CEST

Resending this as original did not seem to reach the list.

> "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato@collab.net> wrote on 10/09/2006 04:01:28 PM:
>> Uh. Hm. Can you perhaps rephrase this bit, then? I obviously missed
>> it the first time around.
>> (that's also why I think the current (trunk) behavior of Subversion
>> should be improved: avoid the option in the configuration file but
>> after the first authorization failure and reauthenticate again but
>> this time with SSPI disabled).
> I think the only issue should be whether the current way this works is
> deemed a bug with a high enough severity to backport to an existing
> release. I happen to think it is.
> Once that is agreed to, then whatever the best solution is, regardless as
> to whether it involves adding a new config option, should be used. Having
> a client authenticate, fail authorization and then reauthenticate does not
> strike me as an ideal solution. Won't this happen over and over again?
> Having an option to just turn the feature off seems better to me and I do
> not see what negative impact this has on existing 1.4 users.
> Mark
Hello everyone,

I am the guy who originally contributed the SSPI support to neon, and I
would like to get it working right for majority of the users.

A possible plan of attack would be:
    * Clearly define what SSPI issues are
    * Agree if there are neon API changes needed. Driven by users such as
    * Clear those changes with Joe Orton (if any)
    * Implement, test, repeat...

The SSPI issues as I understood so far are:

    1) Ability to disable default credential being passed.
    2) Ability to pass alternate credentials but still use SSPI
    3) Ignore SSPI challenge all together
    4) Ability to have separate proxy, server credentials???
    5) Issue with GUEST credentials being used

Please let me know if I missed anything.

I have a good idea about how to deal with the first four (4). I need to
research the GUEST issue, so any relevant info will be appreciated.

At a first glance, it seems the current flag in neon can only solve #3,
but I need to check the code to be sure.

For the Subversion/TSVN team,

What kind of API in neon would make it cleanest for you to work with SSPI?



To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Oct 15 21:44:07 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.