-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32
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
Missing argument for cs_firewall: destcidrlist #76
Comments
@nathanmcgarvey this should already work: - name: Allow inbound port 80/tcp
ngine_io.cloudstack.cs_firewall:
ip_address: 4.3.2.1
zone: zone01
port: 80
cidr:
- 1.2.3.4/32
- 1.2.3.5/32 or - name: Allow inbound port 80/tcp
ngine_io.cloudstack.cs_firewall:
ip_address: 4.3.2.1
zone: zone01
port: 80
cidrs:
- 1.2.3.4/32
- 1.2.3.5/32 could you confirm? |
@resmo I think your example works for ingress rules, but not when doing egress rules. E.g:
That example from the source code allows for the egress from 10.101.1.20 to any destination subnet. If you want to limit that destination subnet, that's the destcidrlist API call that doesn't seem to exist in the module. From https://cloudstack.apache.org/api/apidocs-4.15/apis/createEgressFirewallRule.html: cidrlist | the cidr list to forward traffic from. Multiple entries must be separated by a single comma character (,). | false If I'm reading the source correctly, it's around here that the destcidrlist doesn't' exist: Line 330 in cs_firewall.py:
|
Thanks for the details again and sorry for not reading it carefully enough the first time, I see |
resolved by #84 |
There is an argument to the "createEgressFirewallRule" api call named "destcidrlist". (Ref: https://cloudstack.apache.org/api/apidocs-4.15/apis/createEgressFirewallRule.html)
It seems that this was omitted from the cs_firewall module, or that that module wasn't updated to include destcidrlist when cloudstack 4.10 was released. (https://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/projects/archived-cloudstack-release-notes/en/4.10/api-changes.html)
This means that you cannot make an egress rule with limited destination subnets, though the very similar, but opposing "cidrlist" functionality seems to be implemented.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: