-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 77
New issue
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
why not generate the range syntax when port => 'start:end' is encountered in a rich rule? #163
Comments
Hi @kenyapcomau - are you referring to the custom_service type when declaring multiple ranges like this https://github.com/crayfishx/puppet-firewalld#parameters-3 ? |
Yes that's what I meant, sorry for the confusion. |
Hi guys, We are running into the same issue because firewalld on CentOS 7 wont parse multiple rules in the same xml file. Is there any update on this? |
How do you mean? I haven't checked for a while but firewalld parsed the spec fine but for something like opening up a range of VNC ports, one iptables rules was generated per port, which is unnecessary because port ranges can be specified. In the end I just created a custom service XML file until this is fixed. |
Hi yeah the custom xml option will work however will be a nightmare for management moving forward. |
I just use a puppet stanza that installs a custom XML file from the module's resources, i.e. the files/ directory. I need to override the limited 4 port range of the supplied VNC rule anyway. |
Firewalld was fine with the multi-port list in xml, I made some other schoolboy error. It would probably be better to generate a rule with a hyphen in where appropriate though, as per the original issue. |
I was using this module and a customer asked to open all TCP ports between 1024-65535. When I realized that it would generate 64 thousand lines of xml I was like 'oh no, that will not do'. |
Related to #176 |
Why not generate the single port element:
<port protocol="tcp" port="start-end"/>
instead of lots of port elements like:
<port protocol="tcp" port="start"/>
...
<port protocol="tcp" port="end"/>
This is what the builtin rules use and it would make the iptables rules more compact.
Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: