Bug 903696 - It's possible to create a network with default gateway out of the network's range
It's possible to create a network with default gateway out of the network's r...
Product: Red Hat OpenStack
Classification: Red Hat
Component: openstack-nova (Show other bugs)
2.0 (Folsom)
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: RHOS Maint
Yaniv Kaul
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2013-01-24 10:32 EST by Rami Vaknin
Modified: 2014-01-12 18:54 EST (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2013-02-12 12:06:22 EST
Type: Bug
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 Rami Vaknin 2013-01-24 10:32:53 EST
Description of problem:
Network creation while the specified default gateway is out of the network's range is possible and pass successfully

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Folsom on RHEL6.4, FlatDHCPManager, openstack-nova-2012.2.2-6.el6ost.noarch

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create a network where the default gateway is out of the network's range, for instance:

$ nova-manage network create --label=net08_34 --fixed_range_v4= --bridge=br100 --project_id=a75203c3c0234ea0b3c16565e52af01e --num_networks=1 --gateway=

Actual results:
Command passed successfully.

# mysql -u root nova -e "select id,cidr,netmask,bridge,gateway,broadcast,dhcp_start,label,bridge_interface from networks where label like 'net08_34';"
| id | cidr           | netmask       | bridge | gateway     | broadcast     | dhcp_start  | label    | bridge_interface |
|  8 | | | br100  | | | | net08_34 | eth2             |

Expected results:
The command should fail with an exception which explains that the default gateway's address should be from within the network's range
Comment 2 Russell Bryant 2013-02-12 12:06:22 EST
nova-manage is a very low level admin tool.  It does very little validation and instead just assumes valid input from the admin in many cases.  So, I don't think this is something we need to fix.

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