On 03/11/2013 10:19 AM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
On 03/09/2013 12:52 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
> On 03/08/2013 06:04 AM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
>> On 03/07/2013 01:05 PM, Aravinda wrote:
>>> We can have only two fields in login screen, username and password.
>>> Username will include domain name(username@domain).
>>>
>>> Default domain name can be "internal" if user didn't enter the
domain
>>> name as part of username then we can append the default value and
>>> validate.
>>>
>>> Note: We use username@domain as username when we connect through
>>> <rest_api_url>/api
>>
>> The idea is to *not* have the user type in the domain name, but rather
>> let him/her choose one, just like what happens in webadmin. We should
>> try and minimize typing as much as possible when it comes to mobile apps.
>
> I think this was done on purpose for some reason to not provide a public api for the
rest api, but i could be wrong and don't remember the detail.
> as the concepts of multi tenancy and multiple domains grow, providing the list of
domains is considered an issue,
Is it an issue specific to restapi? For we *do show* the list of domains in webadmin
login screen.
indeed, UI using public query for that, while in api each request has to be
authenticated,
as workaround, i suggest creating internal user for this purpose and using it in the app
(internally) to fetch entities that should not require explicit authentication from the
application PoV.
> and most systems today require user to provide their full user/domain (well, usually
in the form of their email address).
>
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> regards
>>> Aravinda
>>>
>>> On 03/07/2013 11:15 AM, Shireesh Anjal wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> We are trying to develop a simple android app to monitor and manage
>>>> gluster clusters by consuming the restapi exposed by engine. The
>>>> first screen is the login screen, which is similar to the webadmin
>>>> login screen. Here, we want to populate the combo box of
"domains" by
>>>> fetching it from the restapi. However, the domains api cannot be
>>>> invoked without authentication! So we have a sort of a
>>>> chicken-and-egg problem.
>>>>
>>>> Any suggestions on how to tackle this? I feel the "domains"
api
>>>> should be "public", in the sense it should not expect
authentication.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Shireesh
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Engine-devel mailing list
>>>> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>>>>
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Engine-devel mailing list
>>> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>>>
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Engine-devel mailing list
>> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>>
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> Engine-devel mailing list
> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
--
Michael Pasternak
RedHat, ENG-Virtualization R&D