[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] Proposed: always allow packets internal to an interface



On 11/06/2012 11:23 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
ip6tables -I FORWARD 1 -i  virbr18 -o  virbr18  -j  ACCEPT
This one currently isn't getting added, because
networkAddGeneralIp6tablesRules() returns immediately if there are no
ipv6 addresses defined for the network.

Note that up until now, unless someone had an ipv6 address defined for a
network, ip6tables was never called, so theoretically you could run
libvirtd without having ip6tables installed on your machine, but with
this change *all* networks would fail to start if the ip6tables binary
was missing. That *shouldn't* be a problem because (at least on
Fedora/RHEL/CentOS) it is a part of the same package as iptables, but
I've seen strange setups in the last few years - in particular I recall
one Gentoo user whose networks were mysteriously failing, and it was
because he had built the iproute package with some sort of "minimal"
configuration that's available on Gentoo, causing something or other to
fail in a mysterious way (compounded in troubleshooting by the fact that
none of us would ever have expected such a thing).
How about a configure/compile time option for those systems which may not have ip6tables ... the default being that ip6tables is assumed.
"ping"

OK, I have not heard a plain yes or no on this.

IPv4 and IPv6 networks are suppose to have the same (more or less) functionality so why isn't this OK.

If you do want to give someone the option of running without ip6tables, fine make it a compile-time option.

Gene


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]