Feature request: allow for more flexible middlewares #215
Replies: 14 comments 2 replies
-
|
Hi, I think you're right this would be easy to implement and useful for some advanced users. What do you think about being able to define them in the config.yml instead of the UI for now? Every resource has an ID which can be easily found in the URL: resources:
2:
middleware: ["geoblock"]
3:
...Let me know what you think. Obviously a slick UI implementation would be best but this would expose the functionality and be quite easy for us to get out there and then improve upon later. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Oh that also would very usable and ever simpler to implement indeed, Btw it would be up to you guys in how much you want to document this 'temporary' feature, and keeping it backwards compatible when iterating on it and possibly moving it to the frontend. Edit: I realized restarting the Pangolin container (reloading the config) does not interrupt traefik, is that correct? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hi! Congrats on the v1 release. Our initial testing is really positive (the DNS resolving being done on the remote machine is awesome). The site specific middleware config is our only blocker atm. Are there any plans on implementing this in any of the coming releases? Thanks! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Adding my support for this feature. This would be very handy! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I would love to see this! More granular middleware (for WAF usage) controls for specific sites - for example mTLS, geoblock, crowdsec, Basic Auth etc. setup per resource. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I would also love to see this feature. As a start, maybe it can be something simple like this... not the best UI, but should be better than the config text file |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks for the visual @adiroiban. We need to figure out a way to get this into the dev cycle. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I tried this plugin https://github.com/hhftechnology/middleware-manager ... but it's still complicated to move between 2 UIs I think that if we can do something like this in |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yea this would be awesome because otherwise it is really hard to set nextcloud headers and redirects. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Adding my support |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Was about to start a discussion on this, but came across this thread. +1 on having the ability to attach one or more middlewares on the dynamically generated routers. Either middlewares from the file |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I have an interesting case to add here. I am using authentik for identity management in my organization, and pangolin to host services. Now when I want to add a new resource, I actually want to configure authentication in authentik, as that's the place where all my access rules live. Right now, the only way to integrate is to use Authentik OIDC to authenticate to Pangolin, and then configure in pangolin the roles a user must have to access a specific resource. But that means that in Authentik I can only see a user logged in to Pangolin, not which resource specifically. I think that using What do you think? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Any way to manage middleware would be very useful. In my case I only use Docker labels to configure Pangolin, so implementing that feature in a private fork felt like the easiest option right now: main...sippeangelo:pangolin:middlewares It would be cool if it was available through the UI as well. I don't think it makes sense to write the middleware itself in Pangolin, that belongs in the Traefik config, but being able to pick available ones from a dropdown would be nice. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Just being able to enable/disable crowdsec per-resource would be great, some already have auth which makes it completely unnecessary. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.

Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi, I'd like the ability to not apply all optional middleware to all sites. There are cases like
ForwardAuthwhich will be very site specific. There is no good way to achieve this at the moment. I think this feature would add a great deal of flexibility.Atm I can think of two ways to solve this:
badgerMiddlewareNamename).badgerMiddlewareNamename).The new access control rules cover some of the use-cases (which look super nice btw), but can never really cover the full flexibility of traefik itself (nor should it). For our case, having this missing means I cannot migrate due to some sites special config rules.
Would be great to hear any opinions on this.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions