RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1404076 - Querying for a port range within another port range in firewalld gives 'no' output.
Summary: Querying for a port range within another port range in firewalld gives 'no' o...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
Classification: Red Hat
Component: firewalld
Version: 8.1
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Eric Garver
QA Contact: Jiri Peska
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 1563281 (view as bug list)
Depends On: 1637204
Blocks: 1807630 1825061
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-12-13 01:58 UTC by Akhil John
Modified: 2020-11-04 01:40 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version: firewalld-0.8.2-1.el8
Doc Type: No Doc Update
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-11-04 01:39:57 UTC
Type: Bug
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2020:4461 0 None None None 2020-11-04 01:40:21 UTC

Description Akhil John 2016-12-13 01:58:20 UTC 
Description of problem:
If a port is opened and run --query-port, it shows Yes. But if I open a port range and query a port within that range, it shows No.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
- All RHEL 7 versions
- firewalld package

How reproducible:
Add a port range in firewalld using --add-port option and query a port within that range using --query-port. The output shows No

Steps to Reproduce:
1.# firewall-cmd --add-port=8080/tcp; firewall-cmd --add-port=825-830/tcp
2.firewall-cmd --list-all
public (active)
  target: default
  icmp-block-inversion: no
  interfaces: eth0
  sources: 
  services: dhcpv6-client ssh
  ports: 8080/tcp 825-830/tcp
  protocols: 
  masquerade: no
  forward-ports: 
  sourceports: 
  icmp-blocks: 
  rich rules: 

3.

Actual results:
# firewall-cmd --query-port=830/tcp
no

# firewall-cmd --query-port=829/tcp
no

# firewall-cmd --query-port=8080/tcp
yes


Expected results:
# firewall-cmd --query-port=830/tcp
yes

# firewall-cmd --query-port=829/tcp
yes

# firewall-cmd --query-port=8080/tcp
yes

Additional info:
Comment 3 Eric Garver 2018-04-03 14:14:07 UTC 
*** Bug 1563281 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 Eric Garver 2018-08-21 17:49:13 UTC 
Fixes upstream:

  2925de324443 ("ports: allow querying a single added by range")
  3fb707228ced ("tests/regression: add coverage for rhbz 1404076")
Comment 7 Tomas Dolezal 2019-11-06 15:23:14 UTC 
moving to rhel8 as a bug report, ports within a range are correctly reported as present, but that does not apply for subranges.
firewalld-0.7.0-5.el8.noarch

last line should be also 'yes'
for port in 3199 3200 3250 3299 3300 3200-3300 3250-3260 ; do echo -ne "port $port/tcp:\t"; firewall-cmd --query-port $port/tcp; done
port 3199/tcp:	no
port 3200/tcp:	yes
port 3250/tcp:	yes
port 3299/tcp:	yes
port 3300/tcp:	yes
port 3200-3300/tcp:	yes
port 3250-3260/tcp:	no
Comment 8 Tomas Dolezal 2019-11-06 15:27:43 UTC 
(In reply to Tomas Dolezal from comment #7)
> port 3200-3300/tcp:	yes
this port range was defined before the output in previous comment
# firewall-cmd --list-ports
3200-3300/tcp
Comment 10 Eric Garver 2020-03-19 21:06:09 UTC 
Upstream:

fae2b48a5880 ("test: regression/rhbz1404076: enhance to include sub ranges")
f12e1587433c ("fix: source_port: support querying sub ranges")
6c0b07ad482d ("fix: port: support querying sub ranges")
cd8e0c3774a6 ("improvement: port: simplify queryPort")
Comment 20 errata-xmlrpc 2020-11-04 01:39:57 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 (firewalld bug fix and enhancement update), 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://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:4461
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.