Re: Custom Login Server with UAA 2.0+

Bob Brumfield <bob.brumfield@...>


When the uaa and login were merged it was state that replacing replacing
the login server would remain a supported scenario and this seems a
departure from that statement. At the very least, its more complex that it
was pre-merge and requires us to modify and issue our own version of
cf-release which we've tried to avoid as much as possible.

Is there some other approach we should be taking here that we're missing?


Bob Brumfield

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 6:49 AM, Filip Hanik <fhanik(a)> wrote:

hi Sree and Matt,

Matt is actually not referring to the wild cards. He wants the
login.<domain> for his own application.

Matt, at this time we are claiming that domain name, as we did with the
login job. We just moved it from one job to another.
You may certainly take it out of the cf-registrar script and use it
yourself. It is not a configuration that we have tested yet, but I don't
foresee that you run into any major challenges.
There may be some additional settings that you may have to tinker with

You can correspond with Sree, if there is a need for us to completely free
up the 'login' sub domain


On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:44 AM, Sree Tummidi <stummidi(a)> wrote:

Hi Matt,
This new wild card route pattern was introduced for multi-tenancy in UAA
post merge.
Anything before login or uaa in the URL is now treated as a zone
subdomain and the zone context is derived from it.

We will have to look into various approaches to solve this because even
if you take over the login subdomain there is possibility for the code to
misinterpret the url as a zone specific one.

Let me discuss this with the team and get back to you with possible
solutions for the same.


Sent from my iPad

On May 27, 2015, at 9:58 PM, Matt Cholick <cholick(a)> wrote:

Prior to the consolidation of uaa and the login server in uaa release
2.0, we were running our own login server to handle auth to our platform.
We simply reduced the instance of the bundled CF login server to 0 and put
our own in place, which snagged the login subdomain. This worked just fine;
our solution implemented all the needed endpoints to login.

We're now upgrading to a newer release with uaa 2.0+ and having
difficulties. The uaa registrar hardcodes grabbing the login subdomains:
- login.<%= properties.domain %>
- '*.login.<%= properties.domain %>'


This prevents us from taking over login. We locally removed those list
items and our custom login server does continue to work. We have some
questions about the right approach going forward though.

Are uaa and the login server going to continue to merge: to the point
where we can no longer take over the login subdomain? Will this strategy no
longer be feasible? What's the right answer non ldap/saml environments, if
the uaa project's roadmap makes this replacement impossible?

If our current solution will continue to work for the foreseeable future,
would the uaa team be amenable to a pull-request making the uri values
configurable, so we can continue to take over the login subdomain?

-Matt Cholick

cf-dev mailing list

cf-dev mailing list

Join to automatically receive all group messages.