Add firewalld policy "docker-forwarding". #47745
Open
+59
−18
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
robmry
added
kind/enhancement
corhere
reviewed
Apr 23, 2024
robmry
force-pushed
the
firewalld_forwarding_policy
branch
3 times, most recently
from
e840a6a
to
93149a2
Compare
corhere
approved these changes
Apr 24, 2024
libnetwork/iptables/firewalld.go
Outdated
Comment on lines
271
to
274
| if derr.Name == "org.fedoraproject.FirewallD1.Exception" && strings.HasPrefix(err.Error(), "NAME_CONFLICT") { | ||
| log.G(context.TODO()).Debugf("Firewalld: %s policy already exists", dockerFwdPolicy) | ||
| return false, nil | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| if derr.Name == "org.fedoraproject.FirewallD1.Exception" && strings.HasPrefix(err.Error(), "NAME_CONFLICT") { | |
| log.G(context.TODO()).Debugf("Firewalld: %s policy already exists", dockerFwdPolicy) | |
| return false, nil | |
| } | |
| if derr.Name == dbusInterface+".Exception" && len(derr.Args) > 0 { | |
| if msg, ok := derr.Args[0].(string); ok && strings.HasPrefix(msg, "NAME_CONFLICT") { | |
| log.G(context.TODO()).Debugf("Firewalld: %s policy already exists", dockerFwdPolicy) | |
| return false, nil | |
| } | |
| } |
Probably overkill to unpack the error args, but I was curious how awkward it would be to type-assert. Honestly, it's not too awful with the length check lifted into the outer condition.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why, when dbus's Error.Error() is already doing it? ...
moby/vendor/github.com/godbus/dbus/v5/conn.go
Lines 704 to 712 in faf84d7
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ahh, you know something I didn't.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| if derr.Name == "org.fedoraproject.FirewallD1.Exception" && strings.HasPrefix(err.Error(), "NAME_CONFLICT") { | |
| log.G(context.TODO()).Debugf("Firewalld: %s policy already exists", dockerFwdPolicy) | |
| return false, nil | |
| } | |
| if derr.Name == dbusInterface+".Exception" && strings.HasPrefix(err.Error(), "NAME_CONFLICT") { | |
| log.G(context.TODO()).Debugf("Firewalld: %s policy already exists", dockerFwdPolicy) | |
| return false, nil | |
| } |
Allow forwarding from any firewalld zone to the 'docker' zone. This makes it possible to use routable IPv6 addresses on a bridge network, with masquerading disabled, and have the host forward packets to it. Signed-off-by: Rob Murray <rob.murray@docker.com>
robmry
force-pushed
the
firewalld_forwarding_policy
branch
from
93149a2
to
ff8de5e
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
- What I did
Allow forwarding from any firewalld zone to the 'docker' zone.
This makes it possible to use routable IPv6 addresses on a bridge network, with masquerading disabled, and have the host forward packets to it.
- How I did it
Use firewalld's
addPolicymethod ... ignore a NAME_CONFLICT error (policy already exists), and an unknown-method error (becauseaddPolicywas added in firewalld 0.9.0, older versions don't need the policy). If something else goes wrong, log the error but still reload firewalld - there's no need to regress existing functionality by bailing out early. Being cautious, because we don't have good test coverage for firewalld - errors are only logged anyway, normally at debug level.- How to verify it
Without this change...
Using OpenSUSE (firewalld 2.1.1-1.4)
Policy created (but not the pre-existing zone) on first run with the change ...
The policy ends up here ...
Repeat the
curltest ...Daemon restart ...
CentOS 7 (firewalld 0.6.3-11.el7) -
addPolicydoesn't work, but it isn't needed ...- Description for the changelog