No argument for action change in zpa.policies.update_rule

[EddyIskandar]

In zpa.policies.update_rule, there is not argument to change the action of the rule. For example, for access rule, the action is only allow or deny, if user creates a rule that he/she wants to change the action at a later time, there is no argument for this in the function.

[mitchos]

Hi @EddyIskandar thanks for raising this.

I took a look and tried to replicate the issue but I don't seem to have any problems changing an access rule action.

Just to give you some context, I made a design decision to have a single method that covered updating access, timeout and client forwarding rules. I made the decision because if I had a separate method for each then they would essentially be a duplicate with some minor modifications for each rule type (access, timeout, client forwarding).

As a consequence, I admit in hindsight I have been a bit lazy documenting the zpa.policies.update_rule() method. In practicality, kwargs can contain any of the updateable params from either:

• zpa.policies.add_access_rule(),
• zpa.policies.add_timeout_rule()
• zpa.policies.add_client_forwarding_rule()

In testing, I created an access rule and used the following code to update the action:

zpa.policies.update_rule("access", "<Rule ID>", action="DENY")

This worked without issue despite not being listed as a possible kwarg.

Can you please confirm that the functionality works and that the issue is around documentation? Or have I missed the point entirely here and you can you please provide more info? Thanks!

[EddyIskandar]

Hi Mitch, Can confirm that the function works as you said. It was confusing as it was not described in the documentation. Thanks for your support and fast reply. Sincerely, Eddy

…

________________________________ From: Mitch Kelly ***@***.***> Sent: 15 August 2022 12:44 To: mitchos/pyZscaler ***@***.***> Cc: EDDY ISKANDAR BIN MOHD MAHATRI ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [mitchos/pyZscaler] No argument for action change in zpa.policies.update_rule (Issue #134) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of SIT. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe. Hi @EddyIskandar<https://github.com/EddyIskandar> thanks for raising this. I took a look and tried to replicate the issue but I don't seem to have any problems changing an access rule action. Just to give you some context, I made a design decision to have a single method that covered updating access, timeout and client forwarding rules. I made the decision because if I had a separate method for each then they would essentially be a duplicate with some minor modifications for each rule type (access, timeout, client forwarding). As a consequence, I admit in hindsight I have been a bit lazy documenting the zpa.policies.update_rule() method. In practicality, kwargs can contain any of the updateable params from either: * zpa.policies.add_access_rule(), * zpa.policies.add_timeout_rule() * zpa.policies.add_client_forwarding_rule() In testing, I created an access rule and used the following code to update the action: zpa.policies.update_rule("access", "<Rule ID>", action="DENY") This worked without issue despite not being listed as a possible kwarg. Can you please confirm that the functionality works and that the issue is around documentation? Or have I missed the point entirely here and you can you please provide more info? Thanks! — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#134 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANNEARC7KGG54DF2UW75E5TVZHDMLANCNFSM56RASRUQ>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

________________________________ Notice: This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. Singapore Institute of Technology, Co. Reg. No. 200917667D.

[mitchos]

Great to hear we got you there in the end @EddyIskandar!

I'm going to keep this issue open until I've updated the documentation in the next release.

Please don't hesitate if you bump into any other issues, much appreciated.