Bug 1040257
Summary: | cannot add an alias that shares the same root of the existing domain | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | OpenShift Container Platform | Reporter: | Mike Barrett <mbarrett> |
Component: | Node | Assignee: | Luke Meyer <lmeyer> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | libra bugs <libra-bugs> |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | high | ||
Version: | 2.0.0 | CC: | adellape, bleanhar, cryan, jkeck, jolamb, pruan |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | rubygem-openshift-origin-controller-1.17.12.1-1 openshift-origin-broker-1.15.3.1-1 | Doc Type: | Enhancement |
Doc Text: |
By default, users were restricted from creating custom domain name aliases in the cloud domain of their applications to prevent confusion or possible name collisions. This enhancement adds a new ALLOW_ALIAS_IN_DOMAIN setting in the /etc/openshift/broker.conf file on the broker host that allows users to create aliases within the cloud domain. However, the alias must not be in the form <name>-<name>.<cloud-domain>. Aliases taking this standard form of application names are rejected to prevent conflicts. See the OpenShift Enterprise Administration Guide for more information.
|
Story Points: | --- |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2014-02-25 15:41:34 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Mike Barrett
2013-12-11 03:27:53 UTC
Mind you, I haven't actually looked at the code yet, but my guess would be this is a pretty simple fix. My thought was to introduce this as a configurable option, defaulting to the existing behavior (disallow subdomain aliases). Any opposing view - make it non-configurable or default to allow? Proposed fix is at https://github.com/openshift/origin-server/pull/4401 Need someone to review the approach; not sure if I should do something to keep the user from possibly creating an alias that conflicts with another app's name; e.g. someone else with app "bogus-app.oapps.corp.com" could create an alias for it called "myapp-sales.oapps.corp.com" and if they happened to land on the same node host, I'm not sure which would win in the front end web proxy. I'm not sure if customers would care or not. Anyway the fix is there. verified with puddlge-2014-01-30 mynodejsapp1 @ http://mynodejsapp1-demo.ose203.example.com/ (uuid: 52eb49663eefa979ea000001) rhc alias add mynodejsapp1 test.ose203.example.com Alias 'test.ose203.example.com' has been added. Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2014-0209.html |