Replies: 1 comment
-
|
@uc4w6c can you look into this, what do you think of this ? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
In the current implementation, the
authorization_endpointis generated based on the current request hostname and protocol:litellm/litellm/proxy/_experimental/mcp_server/discoverable_endpoints.py
Lines 332 to 336 in 97d9da9
This works in most cases, but I have a somewhat unique situation where the client is communicating with litellm over an internal domain name (eg http://litellm.svc.cluster.local), but the "User-Agent" will access the authorization endpoint from a public name (eg https://litellm.example.com). I do this for two reasons:
<mcp>/authorize) are allowed via the "public name" proxy (for security reasons)What about implementing an optional setting similar to
PROXY_BASE_URL(litellm/litellm/types/proxy/management_endpoints/ui_sso.py
Lines 115 to 118 in 97d9da9
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions