Bug 804587

Summary: firewall-cmd --get-active-zones returns nothing
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) <psimerda>
Component: selinux-policyAssignee: Miroslav Grepl <mgrepl>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 17CC: awilliam, bruno, dominick.grift, dwalsh, jpopelka, mgrepl, robatino, twoerner
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: Reopened
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: selinux-policy-3.10.0-93.fc17 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-03-21 21:58:29 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 752649    

Description Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2012-03-19 10:50:02 UTC
Testing https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_firewalld_and_NetworkManager

Expected results:


firewall-cmd --get-active-zones

The output should look like this ('em1' is in used as an example):
public: em1

Actual results:

[root@dragon ~]# firewall-cmd --get-active-zones
[root@dragon ~]#

Comment 1 Jiri Popelka 2012-03-19 10:56:50 UTC
Does it change when you turn of SELinux (setenforce 0) and restart firewalld (systemctl restart firewalld.service) ?

Comment 2 Jiri Popelka 2012-03-19 11:09:21 UTC
Could be the same SELinux problem that I see:

Mar 19 11:50:56 localhost NetworkManager[343]: <warn> (eth1) firewall zone add/change failed: (9) An SELinux policy prevents this sender from sending this message to this recipient, 0 matched rules; type="method_call", sender=":1.4" (uid=0 pid=343 comm="/usr/sbin/NetworkManager --no-daemon --log-level=D") interface="org.fedoraproject.FirewallD1.zone" member="addInterface" error name="(unset)" requested_reply="0" destination="org.fedoraproject.FirewallD1" (uid=0 pid=331 comm="/usr/bin/python /usr/sbin/firewalld --nofork --deb")

We should probably put a warning to the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_firewalld_and_NetworkManager

Comment 3 Thomas Woerner 2012-03-19 11:28:03 UTC
I have two fully updated F-17 test machines.. on both there is no problem with the interaction of firewalld and NetworkManager. Is the system updated completely (all testing packages applied)?

Comment 4 Jiri Popelka 2012-03-19 11:58:20 UTC
All right, updating to selinux-policy-3.10.0-95.fc17 (from updates-testing) fixes the problem for me.
This should be mentioned on the 'Test case 3' page.

Comment 5 Jiri Popelka 2012-03-19 12:33:57 UTC
From selinux-policy-3.10.0-93.fc17 changelog:
- Allow firewalld to dbus chat with networkmanager

Comment 6 Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2012-03-19 22:26:54 UTC
Confirmed.

Comment 7 Adam Williamson 2012-03-20 23:08:00 UTC
Re-opening this, because -93 was never pushed stable. -95 was submitted as an update but never made it to stable. -104 is pending push to stable. Re-opening this and proposing as a blocker: this is (I believe) the correct bug to track that we need at least selinux-policy -93 in the Beta (we'll actually take 104) to make sure IPv6 works.



-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

Comment 8 Thomas Woerner 2012-03-21 18:12:44 UTC
Reassigning to selinux-policy.

Comment 9 Adam Williamson 2012-03-21 21:58:29 UTC
selinux-policy 104 went stable, so closing again.



-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

Comment 10 Bruno Wolff III 2012-03-22 02:37:37 UTC
-1 blocker -1 NTH Unless there are follow on affects to this issue, I don't think this hits any criteria.

Comment 11 Adam Williamson 2012-03-22 03:59:50 UTC
bruno: it prevented IPv6 working out-of-the-box (one among several bugs of this kind).



-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers