----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "David Jaša" <djasa@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 5:09:47 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Gluster IPTable configuration
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Jaša" <djasa@redhat.com> To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 11:57:11 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Gluster IPTable configuration
Alon Bar-Lev píše v Čt 30. 08. 2012 v 14:40 -0400:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Shireesh Anjal" <sanjal@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org, "Selvasundaram" <sesubram@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 9:37:59 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Gluster IPTable configuration
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Selvasundaram" <sesubram@redhat.com> Cc: "Shireesh Anjal" <sanjal@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 2:35:16 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Gluster IPTable configuration
----- Original Message -----
From: "Selvasundaram" <sesubram@redhat.com> To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Cc: "Shireesh Anjal" <sanjal@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 4:30:16 PM Subject: [Engine-devel] Gluster IPTable configuration
Hi,
I want to add gluster specific IPTable configuration in addition to the ovirt IPTable configuration (if it is gluster node).
There are two approaches, 1. Having one more gluster specific IP table config in db and merge with ovirt IPTable config (merging NOT appending) [I have the patch engine: Gluster specific firewall configurations #7244] 2. Having two different IP Table config (ovirt and ovirt+gluster) and use either one.
Please provide your suggestions or improvements on this.
Hello all,
The mentioned patch[1], adds hard coded gluster code into the bootstrap code, manipulate the firewall configuration to be gluster specific. It hardcoded search for "reject", insert before some other rules.
I believe this hardcode approach is obsolete now that we have proper tools for templates.
A more robust solution would be defining generic profiles, each profile as a template, each template can refer to different profiles, and assign profile to a node.
This way the implementation is not gluster [or any] specific and can be reused for more setups, code is cleaner.
or create custom chains ?
Can you please elaborate what is custom chains? Thanks!
iptables -N my_new_chain iptables -A my_new_chain <rule_1> iptables -A my_new_chain ... iptables -A my_new_chain <rule_n>
# if this <rule> is matched, packet goes through rules in my_new_chain iptables -A INPUT <rule> -j my_new_chain
Hello,
How does this solve the original issue?
It makes it easier for customers who are adding their own IPTables configuration - when we do rhev-h plugins it'll make things easier. This way we don't wipe out the original rules we just add our own chain.
The need to provide different rules to different hosts by software installed on destination?
Standard host needs iptables X. Gluster host needs iptables X+Y. XXX host needs iptables X+Z. Maintainer of Gluster knows what Y is. Maintainer of XXX knows what Z is.
If we merge all to one entry product comes with default X. User override X to A. New version of product comes with default Y. Upgrade options: 1. System continues to use A. 2. Some AI to upgrade and create A'. 3. Revert to Y, dropping user's customization.
Or we can maintain one large table with complete configuration and conditionals.
Alon. _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel