Bug 1476311
Summary: | [Docs][Planning] Include port number 111 in documentation of "Hypervisor Firewall Requirements" | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager | Reporter: | Ulhas Surse <usurse> |
Component: | Documentation | Assignee: | Tahlia Richardson <trichard> |
Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Billy Burmester <bburmest> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | high | ||
Version: | 4.1.3 | CC: | didi, lbopf, lsurette, rbalakri, srevivo, tnisan, trichard, ykaul |
Target Milestone: | ovirt-4.1.6 | Keywords: | Triaged |
Target Release: | --- | Flags: | lsvaty:
testing_plan_complete-
|
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2018-02-12 06:19:03 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | Docs | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Ulhas Surse
2017-07-28 15:29:19 UTC
*** Bug 1476308 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Didi, can you provide the info required for the table (Protocol, Source, Destination, Purpose) for port 111? I guess the reason for including it is bug 1177624. Tal, can you provide the information Tahlia asked for? Thanks. I basically moved them from one section in the config to another according to bug 1177624, it is used for the portmapper (In reply to Tal Nisan from comment #4) > I basically moved them from one section in the config to another according > to bug 1177624, it is used for the portmapper Yes, I saw that, but why? This table has (Protocol, Source, Destination, Purpose). Protocol is "portmapper". Destination is "Virtualization Host". Not sure about the source (engine? another host? no idea) and Purpose (the bug implies we might use it for statsd notifications about locks, but bug 1177624 comment 3 says we do not actually use nfs locks, so not sure). For example, see the table here: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_virtualization/4.1/html/planning_and_prerequisites_guide/requirements#host-firewall-requirements From email with Tal: > The destination is "virtualization host" the protocol is "port mapper" > and the source is "NFS storage server" I still have two things to follow up on: 1. A short description of what the port is for (i.e. the Purpose column in https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_virtualization/4.1/html/planning_and_prerequisites_guide/requirements#host-firewall-requirements) 2. I'm confused by the Protocol being "portmapper". All other ports in the table linked above have either TCP or UDP under the Protocol column. Checking the open ports on one of my own hosts suggests TCP for port 111. Reviewed, all OK. Merged. |