Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
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 2069852

Summary: iptables-services is empty
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 Reporter: Michel Lind <michel>
Component: iptablesAssignee: Phil Sutter <psutter>
Status: CLOSED MIGRATED QA Contact: qe-baseos-daemons
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: CentOS StreamCC: bstinson, davide, jwboyer, kcleveng, michel, todoleza
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: MigratedToJIRA, Reopened
Target Release: ---Flags: pm-rhel: mirror+
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 2065788 Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-09-21 10:04:05 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:
Bug Depends On: 2065788    
Bug Blocks:    

Description Michel Lind 2022-03-29 21:23:46 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #2065788 +++

Description of problem:

iptables-services is empty and does not contain iptables.service

While legacy services are disabled anyway in c9s, we're shipping them in EPEL9 in iptables-epel, which is forked from c9s' iptables instead of Fedora's iptables as we want a slower moving target to rebase on.

I'm restoring this section in EPEL 9 (basing it off the Fedora iptables spec), but it would be nice to have it in c9s too to make future merges easier, thanks!

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

1.8.7-30.el9

Comment 1 Phil Sutter 2022-03-30 06:52:07 UTC
Hi,

Why don't you use iptables-nft-services? Are you really depending on legacy iptables in C9S? If so, why?

Cheers, Phil

Comment 2 Michel Lind 2022-03-30 18:17:29 UTC
(In reply to Phil Sutter from comment #1)
> Hi,
> 
> Why don't you use iptables-nft-services? Are you really depending on legacy
> iptables in C9S? If so, why?
> 
Yes, we are - it's a long story :(

(Though that also means we're not affected by the recent nftables CVEs)

Comment 3 Michel Lind 2022-03-30 18:25:15 UTC
TL;DR - we run custom kernels, and for internal reasons we don't support NFT

Comment 4 Michel Lind 2022-04-01 17:20:05 UTC
By the way, Phil, any idea why the c9s iptables.spec has legacy subpackages obsoleting older non-legacy ones, but the Fedora spec doesn't?

Seems to be introduced in this commit on the CentOS side.
https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/iptables/-/commit/4a68e9f94a009775f3133e69780c375979740e2e

(we're noticing this because I rebased the EPEL one to the latest Stream spec, and it's not installable because -30 has not made it out past QA yet, and we noticed the Obsoletes line (even without that it would have FTIed anyway)

Comment 5 Phil Sutter 2022-04-05 13:46:22 UTC
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #4)
> By the way, Phil, any idea why the c9s iptables.spec has legacy subpackages
> obsoleting older non-legacy ones, but the Fedora spec doesn't?

I think this is to accommodate for upgrades, maybe from CentOS8 to CentOS9. I
don't quite remember, sorry.

Comment 6 Phil Sutter 2022-08-11 16:57:59 UTC
Originally, the plan was to ship legacy iptables with C9S or at least build
packages for it but it seems this never worked (and I didn't check). At least I
just noticed that:

| %global do_legacy_pkg ! 0%{?rhel}

does not distinguish between RHEL9 and C9S as %rhel is defined for the latter,
too.

The reason why iptables' spec file is so complicated is that existence of
legacy ebtables and arptables packages is assumed and the legacy services
packages conflict with iptables-nft-services.

To my surprise though, legacy arptables and ebtables packages were retired from C9S a year ago. So we might just drop all these workarounds.

So what do you need for EPEL? Does an iptables-legacy package like in Fedora
suffice? Are you fine with having to flip a switch in spec file to build it?
Otherwise we'll have to actively exclude it from RHEL9, I guess.

Cheers, Phil

Comment 8 Phil Sutter 2023-08-30 15:23:49 UTC
Closing for lack of feedback from reporter.

Comment 9 Michel Lind 2023-08-30 18:18:32 UTC
(In reply to Phil Sutter from comment #6)
> So what do you need for EPEL? Does an iptables-legacy package like in Fedora
> suffice? Are you fine with having to flip a switch in spec file to build it?
> Otherwise we'll have to actively exclude it from RHEL9, I guess.
>

Ideally this MR is merged: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/iptables/-/merge_requests/27

this basically fixes the empty service file. We want to keep the iptables-epel spec as close as possible to the centos stream spec - but if you want to clean up the stream spec to drop the legacy parts completely, that works too.

The middle ground where the legacy parts are present but disabled, *but* buggy, makes it hard to keep the iptables-epel package (which ships only the legacy packages) in sync.

Thanks!

Comment 11 RHEL Program Management 2023-09-21 10:00:23 UTC
Issue migration from Bugzilla to Jira is in process at this time. This will be the last message in Jira copied from the Bugzilla bug.

Comment 12 RHEL Program Management 2023-09-21 10:04:05 UTC
This BZ has been automatically migrated to the issues.redhat.com Red Hat Issue Tracker. All future work related to this report will be managed there.

Due to differences in account names between systems, some fields were not replicated.  Be sure to add yourself to Jira issue's "Watchers" field to continue receiving updates and add others to the "Need Info From" field to continue requesting information.

To find the migrated issue, look in the "Links" section for a direct link to the new issue location. The issue key will have an icon of 2 footprints next to it, and begin with "RHEL-" followed by an integer.  You can also find this issue by visiting https://issues.redhat.com/issues/?jql= and searching the "Bugzilla Bug" field for this BZ's number, e.g. a search like:

"Bugzilla Bug" = 1234567

In the event you have trouble locating or viewing this issue, you can file an issue by sending mail to rh-issues. You can also visit https://access.redhat.com/articles/7032570 for general account information.