Re: Re: Load balancing required for preauthentication?
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 18:32:51 -0500
Andrew Miller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I misread SmbSession.interrogate, thinking it took a UniAddress. The
> first thing it does is get a UniAddress from the NbtAddress, so it my
> mod still seems to work.
> While I was building a new .jar for myself, I removed the System.out
> calls from jcifs.util.transport.Transport.
> On 11/10/05, Andrew Miller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I'm updating to 1.2.6 from a very old release and have been having signing problems. I determined it to be signing because turning off the signing requirement in 2003 Server allowed for successful authentication.
> > While stepping through the code in the debugger, I noticed that SmbSession.getChallenge(UniAddress) does not attempt to use the DEFAULT credentials for preauthentication. I switched to calling SmbSession.getChallengeForDomain() and it seems to work fine.
Only getChallengeForDomain uses preauthentication because that is what
the NtlmHttpFilter uses. Load balancing is option with our Filter. Look
at source of NtlmHttpFilter.java for how we do that.
Also, as a side note, if you're developing your own Filter you should
know that juggling credentials in the http session is non-trivial. It
is STRONGLY advised that you follow the NtlmHttpFilter very carefully.
> > To fix my code, I think I am going to make a local change to add a method like SmbSession.getChallenge(UniAddress) that calls SmbSesesion.interrogate(UniAddress).challenge;
> > Does this sound appropriate?
> > Is there a reason this is not currently done this way?
> > For a little background, this is for a Java web server that is using code similar to the NtlmHttpFilter. I'm currently developing on Mac OS X 10.4.3 with Java 1.5 talking to a Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition running in VMWare on a Window XP Professional laptop. I'm testing with Firefox from my Mac though I occassionally click around on IE in a Windows 2000 VM to make sure that it works too.
> > We typically want to enable load balancing but would like to make it a configurable option.
> > Thanks, Andy