Bug 533193 - RFE: network: Add iptables rules to a custom chain - allows users to insert rules before libvirt's rules
RFE: network: Add iptables rules to a custom chain - allows users to insert r...
Status: NEW
Product: Virtualization Tools
Classification: Community
Component: libvirt (Show other bugs)
All Linux
low Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Libvirt Maintainers
: 972368 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks: libvirtTodoNetwork
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2009-11-05 10:16 EST by Jeremy Katz
Modified: 2017-08-05 08:52 EDT (History)
14 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Jeremy Katz 2009-11-05 10:16:16 EST
The default iptables rules added by libvirt preclude having any rules set up on your system to forward traffic to a guest as they include putting REJECT rules into the FORWARD chain
Comment 1 Daniel Berrange 2009-11-05 12:26:50 EST
We need to re-arrange the way we add iptables rules to address this in a good manner.

Currently we put them directly into the INPUT/OUTPUT/FORWARD chains, inserting at position 0. This makes it hard for admins to put other rules ahead of our own, since every time we start a new guest its rules get placed ahead of custom rules.

What we need todo is to move all our rules to a custom chain.  libvirt_INPUT, libvirt_OUTPUT and libvirt_FORWARD. When libvirtd starts up we should create those 3 chains and insert them at position 0 in the main INPUT, OUTPUT & FORWARD chains.  When starting VMs the per-VM rules should be in our custom chain. 

This will allow admins to add their own rules to the main INPUT, OUTPUT, FORWARD chains and guarentee they'll always be ahead of any of libvirts per-VM rules.
Comment 2 Bug Zapper 2009-11-16 10:09:07 EST
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 12 development cycle.
Changing version to '12'.

More information and reason for this action is here:
Comment 3 Mark McLoughlin 2009-11-19 05:23:40 EST
Makes sense, moving upstream - it's been like this for a long time now, so there's no particular point in tracking it as a Fedora bug
Comment 4 David Ayers 2012-03-06 00:59:10 EST
I'm confused about the status of this issue.  Does "moving upstream" mean:
A) a separate bug was submitted in another bug tracker
B) a change in product/component with this remaining the primary bug

In case of A) could we have a URL to the bug?
In case of B) what is the status, has anyone worked on this?

Could the suggestion in comment 1 be implemented in existing installations via manual configuration and if so how should one go about it?
Comment 5 Ján Tomko 2015-03-17 12:58:56 EDT
*** Bug 972368 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 Cole Robinson 2016-03-20 18:50:52 EDT
AFAICT this is still relevant with latest libvirt. firewalld may help here, but not all distros use firewalld

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