Liberty verses WAS - whats the pros/cons
Not being familiar with either WAS or Liberty , I'm wondering what, if any, benefits in going to WAS. We are not using LDAP or SSO. I know WAS is problematic in changing user passwords aside from that i don't know much else.
3 answers
Norman,
During our move to 6.02 we used liberty.
One thing that caused us great issue were the CLM applications DCC and LQE. They are both resource hogs and need to be installed into their own separate individual servers (bare metal or VM). The resources they consume in 6.02 will make DNG unusable if they are not split out from the applications in CLM.
Elaborate some more when you say that you're having access issues. Letting your choice for WAS or Liberty depend on that seems a bit shortsighted to me. Better spend time checking on your access issues first, e.g. what LDAP can do for you.
Also, download and play with CLM 6.0.2, so you at least get a feel of Liberty.
Comments
On our access issue, we're migration from a 502 https single clm install onto a new vlan for 602. The move in vlan is required in order to support external user access to JAZZ and as part of this capability in order to meet corporate security requirements , we're dropping https so that the firewall can scan incoming packets. To better illustrate our new topology users https -> F5 (firewall does ssl offload -> http to nginx (proxy) -> http to jazz servers.
Having set up a jazz testbed using the JKE banking sample pa in this env, both CCM and RQM get good responses, DNG however does not. If using IE 11, it times out loading a page whereas FF or Chrome do return but 30+ seconds to load a page is unacceptable.
We're not using LDAP or SSO due to our environment.