Bug 55123 - Iptables rules will not accept the word notice as a logging level.
Iptables rules will not accept the word notice as a logging level.
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 54280
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: iptables (Show other bugs)
i386 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Bernhard Rosenkraenzer
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2001-10-25 16:40 EDT by Tom Diehl
Modified: 2008-05-01 11:38 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2001-10-26 02:21:47 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
patch (832 bytes, patch)
2001-10-26 01:32 EDT, Michael Schwendt
no flags Details | Diff

  None (edit)
Description Tom Diehl 2001-10-25 16:40:44 EDT
Description of Problem:When trying to load the log-level of notice in an 
iptables rule iptables complains that this is not valid. Changing to log 
level 5 works. The man page states the following:
 --log-level level
              Level of logging (numeric or see syslog.conf(5)). 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):1.2.3-1

How Reproducible:Every time

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Load the rule with LOg turned on with --log-level set to notice.

Actual Results:iptables gives an error that loglevel notice is invalid

Expected Results:Should load the rule.

Additional Information:These rules were working for a long time on a 7.0 
machine. Upon upgrade they refused to load.
Comment 1 Michael Schwendt 2001-10-26 01:24:17 EDT
iptables-1.2.3/extensions/libipt_LOG.c -> parse_level(..) is bad.

But this is fixed with iptables-1.2.4.
Comment 2 Michael Schwendt 2001-10-26 01:32:32 EDT
Created attachment 35161 [details]
Comment 3 Tom Diehl 2001-10-26 01:35:36 EDT
Am I correct that there is no official redhat fix?
Comment 4 Michael Schwendt 2001-10-26 02:21:42 EDT
Btw, duplicate of bug #54280.
Comment 5 Bernhard Rosenkraenzer 2001-10-30 06:52:35 EST

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 54280 ***

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