Bug 1393564 - Subscribing by proxy to RHN mirror appliance fails with Apache 2.4
Summary: Subscribing by proxy to RHN mirror appliance fails with Apache 2.4
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Appliance
Version: 5.7.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
low
Target Milestone: GA
: cfme-future
Assignee: Gregg Tanzillo
QA Contact: Jan Krocil
URL:
Whiteboard: appliance:server_role
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-11-09 21:20 UTC by Nick Carboni
Modified: 2023-09-14 03:34 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-09-15 13:53:35 UTC
Category: ---
Cloudforms Team: CFME Core
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Nick Carboni 2016-11-09 21:20:01 UTC
Description of problem:
The apache config file that exposes the yum repo created for rhn mirroring uses outdated configuration in the "Directory" section.

This causes clients to always receive a 403 Forbidden error when trying to access the yum repo.


To reproduce you would need to configure one appliance to pull updates from a valid subscription (subscription manager credentials should work fine) and enable the "RHN Mirror" role, which should fetch all the rpms from the selected repos needed for updating cfme-appliance and create a repo at `/repo` on the appliance.

Then add a second appliance to the region which should (eventually) subscribe "by proxy" to the rhn mirror appliance, but this process fails with a 403 when trying to access the repo.

This can be fixed by changing the permissions in the apache config for the repo virtual host from:
    Order allow,deny
    Allow from all
to:
    Require all granted

This fixes the issue.

I'm marking this as low severity because apache was updated in version 5.5 so it seems like this may not be a particularly in-demand feature. If it is more work to maintain than it is useful maybe we should remove it entirely? This possibility was originally raised as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1388951

Thoughts?

Comment 2 Nick Carboni 2016-11-09 21:26:07 UTC
John,

Looking for some input as to how useful this feature is given there are other solutions providing similar, if not identical, functionality (Satellite / Pulp); and also if we know of anyone actively relying on it.

Thanks

Comment 3 Nick Carboni 2017-09-15 13:53:35 UTC
Closing this as the feature was removed in https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/pull/15156

Comment 4 Red Hat Bugzilla 2023-09-14 03:34:05 UTC
The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 1000 days


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.