Bug 1325335

Summary: [RFE] allow negation of icmp-blocks zone configuration field
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Reporter: Tomas Dolezal <todoleza>
Component: firewalldAssignee: Thomas Woerner <twoerner>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Tomas Dolezal <todoleza>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 7.2CC: lmiksik
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: FutureFeature, RFE
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: firewalld-0.4.2-1.el7 Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-11-03 21:02:45 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Tomas Dolezal 2016-04-08 13:10:52 UTC
Description of problem:
based on discussion from
bug 1136801 comment 11 and
bug 1136801 comment 15

There came an idea to have possibility to include the only icmp types in icmp-blocks field instead of excluding them.

To have it as follows:
* 'icmp-blocks' becomes 'icmp-filter' - it should be backwards compatible with (possibly hidden) 'icmp-blocks' setting
* default behaviour stays the same
* rough description: the whole field can be negated (could use a '!'); from --list-all or --zone-info it's apparent what behaviour is currently set.
* behaviour is not dependent on 'default-target' of a zone (would be anti-UX) (this was in original idea)

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
firewalld-0.3.9-14.el7

Additional info:
In el7 icmp-blocks are added one at a time, this might pose a problem with field's functional inversion

Comment 8 errata-xmlrpc 2016-11-03 21:02:45 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2597.html