Issue 3407: Adding firewall info to the IOR (sec-rev)
Source:  (, )
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: 2. The other problem I could see was related to adding firewall info to the
IOR. If a client makes a call to a server thru a firewall(s) and the server
returns (1.0) IOR's then those IOR's should have the firewall information
added to them. The other problem is that if the client calls the server and
passes an IOR with firewall info in it then there are other issues, for
example

	- The IOR passed has the same firewall info as the IOR of the
objects being called. In this case the server should strip off the firewall
information in order to use the IOR.
	- The IOR passed has different firewall info than the IOR of the
objects being called. In this case the server should keep the firewall info.

This implies that the marshalling and unmarshalling code should add/remove
firewall info to IOR depending on the firewall information of the objects
IOR. 

Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
March 3, 2000: received issue
March 24, 2000: moved from Firewall RTF to Security RTF
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
From: Greg McClement <Greg.McClement@seagatesoftware.com>
To: "'issues@omg.org'" <issues@omg.org>
Subject: FW: Firewall RTF Report
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 09:00:55 -0800 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-UIDL: H~Ud9NH;!!e04!!KOnd9

I wanted to raise some issues with the firewall report (Firewall RTF)
related to SOCKS and IOR's.


2. The other problem I could see was related to adding firewall info
to the
IOR. If a client makes a call to a server thru a firewall(s) and the
server
returns (1.0) IOR's then those IOR's should have the firewall
information
added to them. The other problem is that if the client calls the
server and
passes an IOR with firewall info in it then there are other issues,
for
example

	- The IOR passed has the same firewall info as the IOR of the
objects being called. In this case the server should strip off the
firewall
information in order to use the IOR.
	- The IOR passed has different firewall info than the IOR of
the
objects being called. In this case the server should keep the firewall
info.

This implies that the marshalling and unmarshalling code should
add/remove
firewall info to IOR depending on the firewall information of the
objects
IOR. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Chapman [mailto:Martin.Chapman@ebeon.com]
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2000 7:22 AM
To: 'Greg McClement'
Subject: RE: Firewall RTF Report


Greg,
The RTf report only covers issues that were raisedf and registred. No
one
raised any issues on either of these areas and hence were not
addressed.

If you want to raise them as new issues please email issues@omg.org.

Martin.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg McClement [mailto:Greg.McClement@seagatesoftware.com]
> Sent: 02 March 2000 23:25
> To: 'martin.chapman@ebeon.com'
> Subject: Firewall RTF Report
> 
> 
> I wanted to raise some issues with the firewall report 
> related to SOCKS
> 
> 1. If information is required for authentication with the 
> socks server then
> there is no direction given on how to get this. The solution 
> should not be
> pop up a dialog because server programs would hang. It would 
> be nice to have
> some kind of callback to the orb clients that could request 
> password. Then
> the client could decide to throw an error or pop up a dialog box.
> 
> 2. The other problem I could see was related to adding 
> firewall info to the
> IOR. If a client makes a call to a server thru a firewall(s) 
> and the server
> returns (1.0) IOR's then those IOR's should have the firewall 
> information
> added to them. The other problem is that if the client calls 
> the server and
> passes an IOR with firewall info in it then there are other 
> issues, for
> example
> 
>	- The IOR passed has the same firewall info as the IOR of the
> objects being called. In this case the server should strip 
> off the firewall
> information in order to use the IOR.
>	- The IOR passed has different firewall info than the IOR of
> the
> objects being called. In this case the server should keep the 
> firewall info.
> 
> This implies that the marshalling and unmarshalling code 
> should add/remove
> firewall info to IOR depending on the firewall information of 
> the objects
> IOR. 
> 
>