Rename OidcClientRequestFilter filter to OidcRequestFilter #36915
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a follow up to #36634, this code is currently on
main
only, so I'd like to apply these changes before 3.6.0.CR1 is out:OidcClientRequestFilter
since we already haveOidcClientRequestFilter
whose job is not to intercept OIDC requests but act as an OidcClient to acquire tokens and then propagate it to the target services. In fact, theOidcClientRequestFilter
filter introduced in Introduce OidcRequestFilter #36634 can intercept this existiingOidcClientRequestFilter
doing the OIDC requests - it can confuse everybody, so I renamed to a more appropriateOidcRequestFilter
and clarified it in the docscontextProperties
, which is simply a Map wrapper at this time and will have more type specific getters likegetStringProperty
or may beget(String name, Class<T> type)
etc. I'll fill it in a bit more in a follow up enhancement. The main reason is to support use cases where for example a JWK set acquisition has to be delayed and when this filter will need to analyze some context properties, example, a token or something else. Also, it is a protection in case something else has been missed in which case we will pass it as an extra propertyCC @calvernaz