Open karuboniru opened 9 months ago
Thanks for the report, yes this looks like a valid bug. However please keep in mind that we do not recommend using the firewalld driver (at the moment), see https://github.com/containers/netavark/issues/722 for more problems
@mheon can this be scoped up into your firewalld work ?
This is definitely part of the remaining work for firewalld
When specifying
-p 10.52.0.2:1111:1111
to podman, my intention was to forward traffic coming from10.52.0.2:1111
tocontainer:1111
. While when using firewalld as backend, the generated rule iswhich will forward any traffic to port 1111 to
10.52.0.2:1111
I think in this case, we should use rich rule in
netavark_portfwd
zone likeinstead of the forward-ports rule.
reproduce