all groups > iis security > november 2005 >
You're in the

iis security

group:

SPN for website (with AppPool) running under a Host Header



SPN for website (with AppPool) running under a Host Header Iain Sandercock
11/22/2005 9:42:01 PM
iis security: Hi All,

I've dealt alot with kerberos in the past, and have a good understanding. My
dilemma is that I'm trying to get a more complex scenario running, and am
after a definitive example from someone who has got this working, just to
confirm that I'm heading down the right path....

I have a webserver with 3 websites, each one runs under its own
apppool/worker identity

1- Default Web site - WSS SP1, with host header for machine FQDN
(webserver.test.com)
2 - specific website with Host Header name ( which is a CNAME Alias for this
webserver = workspace.test.com)
3 - Sharepoint Central Administration website (with standard [non port 80]
port for WSS admin site)

Running the K2 website under the networkservice identity works, but as soon
as I change it to use an AppPool this breaks. I've read various MS KB
articles about this, and have made sure that I am isolating via AppPools at
the website level (i.e. this app pool is used for all application on that 1
website)

So, when I register an SPN, should it be this

Setspn -A HTTP/workspace.test.com TEST\<App Pool username>
Setspn -A HTTP/workspace

Is there something that I should also be doing? Does anyone have any other
suggestions for what SPNs should be registered instead?


Thanks in Advance

Cheers

RE: SPN for website (with AppPool) running under a Host Header Iain Sandercock
11/22/2005 9:50:06 PM
yes, I know that the 2nd SPN entry should also have the domain and app pool
identity....that was just a cut & paste typo in my original post

Setspn -A HTTP/workspace.test.com TEST\<App Pool username>
Setspn -A HTTP/workspace TEST\<App Pool username>


[quoted text, click to view]
Re: SPN for website (with AppPool) running under a Host Header Ken Schaefer
11/28/2005 12:00:00 AM
That is correct. You can use SetSPN to ensure that the SPNs exist under the
Test\App Pool Username user account.

Additionally, you can use LDIFDE (or other tool) to ensure that there are no
duplicate SPNs (i.e. an SPN for that FQDN registred under another user or
machine account in AD)

ldifde -f ldif.txt -j c:\ -d dc=yourdomain,dc=com -l serviceprincipalname -r
(serviceprincipalname=HTTP*)"


Cheers
Ken



"Iain Sandercock" <iain.sandercock@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:66D0DA0F-CE38-4079-ADA4-D0DB12758703@microsoft.com...
: yes, I know that the 2nd SPN entry should also have the domain and app
pool
: identity....that was just a cut & paste typo in my original post
:
: Setspn -A HTTP/workspace.test.com TEST\<App Pool username>
: Setspn -A HTTP/workspace TEST\<App Pool username>
:
:
[quoted text, click to view]
:
: > Hi All,
: >
: > I've dealt alot with kerberos in the past, and have a good
understanding. My
: > dilemma is that I'm trying to get a more complex scenario running, and
am
: > after a definitive example from someone who has got this working, just
to
: > confirm that I'm heading down the right path....
: >
: > I have a webserver with 3 websites, each one runs under its own
: > apppool/worker identity
: >
: > 1- Default Web site - WSS SP1, with host header for machine FQDN
: > (webserver.test.com)
: > 2 - specific website with Host Header name ( which is a CNAME Alias for
this
: > webserver = workspace.test.com)
: > 3 - Sharepoint Central Administration website (with standard [non port
80]
: > port for WSS admin site)
: >
: > Running the K2 website under the networkservice identity works, but as
soon
: > as I change it to use an AppPool this breaks. I've read various MS KB
: > articles about this, and have made sure that I am isolating via AppPools
at
: > the website level (i.e. this app pool is used for all application on
that 1
: > website)
: >
: > So, when I register an SPN, should it be this
: >
: > Setspn -A HTTP/workspace.test.com TEST\<App Pool username>
: > Setspn -A HTTP/workspace
: >
: > Is there something that I should also be doing? Does anyone have any
other
: > suggestions for what SPNs should be registered instead?
: >
: >
: > Thanks in Advance
: >
: > Cheers
: >
: > iain

AddThis Social Bookmark Button