We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add an alternate syntax to the RouteClaimsRequirement configuration. Instead of the current shorter (and nicer) current syntax of:
RouteClaimsRequirement
"RouteClaimsRequirement": { "{ClaimType}": "{ClaimValue}" }
Support a more verbose array syntax as well:
"RouteClaimsRequirement": [ { "type": "{ClaimType}", "value": "{ClaimValue}" } ]
Microsoft uses a : to signify hierarchy in configuration files. See dotnet/extensions#782
There is a great workaround on issue 679 that would be unnecessary if an alternate syntax could be used without the : in a key value.
The most common/reported issue is with the default MS role claim type http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/role
http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/role
Currently this does not work and requires a workaround:
"RouteClaimsRequirement": { "http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/role": "Administrator" }
Having an alternate syntax would fix this and "just work":
"RouteClaimsRequirement": [ { "type": "http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/role", "value": "Administrator" } ]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Don't implemented?
Sorry, something went wrong.
I'm having the same problem and was about to suggest the same feature.
@ghorsey Hi Geoff! Will you personally contribute and be responsible for feature delivery?
No branches or pull requests
New Feature
Add an alternate syntax to the
RouteClaimsRequirement
configuration. Instead of the current shorter (and nicer) current syntax of:Support a more verbose array syntax as well:
Motivation for New Feature
Microsoft uses a : to signify hierarchy in configuration files.
See dotnet/extensions#782
There is a great workaround on issue 679 that would be unnecessary if an alternate syntax could be used without the : in a key value.
The most common/reported issue is with the default MS role claim type
http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/role
Currently this does not work and requires a workaround:
Having an alternate syntax would fix this and "just work":
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: