Multiple LDAP with Jazz Authorization Server
2 answers
Hi Pumtat,
because JAS is based on the WAS libertiy profile, this is possible with help of a federate repository REALM definition, with multiple LDAP registries (e.g. multiple AD forests). So the login and the group mapping goes through multiple LDAP registries.
One trick is, in the group mapping of JTS/CCM/QM you can have multiple groups mapped per repository role. SO you can map groups from different LDAP registries.
See also my question / answers on:
There exists a plan item in jazz.net (currently planned for V.6.0.1-M5 where JTS should become able to search the users out of JAS instead directly from LDAP.
Note: don't be confused by the login/group resolution of a user agains the import/synch/update of the User DB. This are two complettly different handled processes. The first is WAS the second is JTS.
regards
Guido
because JAS is based on the WAS libertiy profile, this is possible with help of a federate repository REALM definition, with multiple LDAP registries (e.g. multiple AD forests). So the login and the group mapping goes through multiple LDAP registries.
One trick is, in the group mapping of JTS/CCM/QM you can have multiple groups mapped per repository role. SO you can map groups from different LDAP registries.
See also my question / answers on:
- https://jazz.net/forum/questions/206291/ldap-integration-with-multiple-ldap-dns-mulitple-ad-forests-with-jazz-v60-and-later
- https://jazz.net/forum/questions/208725/howto-filter-out-disabled-users-in-a-federate-repositories-realm-within-was
There exists a plan item in jazz.net (currently planned for V.6.0.1-M5 where JTS should become able to search the users out of JAS instead directly from LDAP.
Note: don't be confused by the login/group resolution of a user agains the import/synch/update of the User DB. This are two complettly different handled processes. The first is WAS the second is JTS.
regards
Guido
Hi Pumtat, No Jazz (CLM) cannot be configured to integrate with multiple LDAP.
I believe your query comes from a background of LDAP requiring failover/ load balancing so that a backup LDAP takes over when the primary fails (or is unavailable).
In general, the best way to handle the situation as above is to design the LDAP system in high availability mode and configure CLM to use the HA LDAP URL so CLM is unware of the LDAP switch.
I see this post discuss the same scenario for your reference : https://jazz.net/forum/questions/158923
Best Regards
Sunil