From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from azazel.net (taras.nevrast.org [35.176.194.208]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC6BB49651 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2024 20:19:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=35.176.194.208 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720124362; cv=none; b=B0R/OEQoog7SHQpUYb02psjSQkLboHGdZcbTlp0YDmcc1yMRBOaVHd9s0mbJGlQCMQ54B4szfpXfQzvb7mnNMN+su8P3sYlRxeKp0swOR6kex4Vtrc2hiTJr8okqdbECIxHAJ3kl5M/jdQmWw3gjhuhzvU8H3jh5LC0TwtykcKY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720124362; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4IhmFi4w9nfWUSYZJ2xZ2pkm+3zTfwOh9OPTKt9fwuU=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=T5EJ6YSgywmCV0wVpMca+TXt5zWmQX3GqxNwkXJlJH5+smkKH+jKPnsLqT4FkxOMTs1hUPWarJ/e8cq4EyQaqacDsxq54FfXwlNroDeo+dOxD9EZ9Jy6wb8XVjul1iO7RTGU5ilwFPWBs0iRTNxX6uPKPOHOmH1JN+TbhONRiN8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=azazel.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=azazel.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=azazel.net header.i=@azazel.net header.b=Qe/iJTJB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=35.176.194.208 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=azazel.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=azazel.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=azazel.net header.i=@azazel.net header.b="Qe/iJTJB" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=azazel.net; s=20220717; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=tUiy4lprizOcQN30uJLDAFyeZbnTYo0C93Dgu7ZhzMc=; b=Qe/iJTJBkOzsZwMH+MX+TaWSQo vC0ED/Sn6DryQAtDkCU2xUtu+OJuYfzczswq3/F1mdeL4yB3yBwPMskvgj3TmoOdnIfO42f30aa+z kmZD1UlHtd7Zs2KEl0zSHKNsiN+K84UaVydh8hMI6olScU+kQUP+fVUGHr41s8GPCaaZ0ikKr2A9r F8qm2XIrWogR7EKKzSriSNkGHNEU6ht9bqk6uji8DJ3eIn5LNGX4f9A48ZJ6y5rD1+P7OYmcWKKpm sW6iZYCez2wSFiD3ERZQh0TLiFJtH5yFYQGnyveFtI3vTGmf/dY6+GXILl1sW8W+Ac62c3Kuhqj73 pI4bs8CQ==; Received: from celephais.dreamlands.azazel.net ([2001:8b0:fb7d:d6d7:3c21:9cff:fe2f:35f] helo=celephais.dreamlands) by taras.nevrast.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1sPSv5-004Hwu-31; Thu, 04 Jul 2024 21:19:07 +0100 Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 21:19:06 +0100 From: Jeremy Sowden To: Eric Garver , Phil Sutter , Netfilter Devel , Michael Biebl Subject: Re: iptables: reverting 34f085b16073 ("Revert "xshared: Print protocol numbers if --numeric was given"") Message-ID: <20240704201906.GA3592786@celephais.dreamlands> References: <20240703160204.GA2296970@azazel.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DXPQGkiBPCxlnzSi" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:8b0:fb7d:d6d7:3c21:9cff:fe2f:35f X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: jeremy@azazel.net X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on taras.nevrast.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false --DXPQGkiBPCxlnzSi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2024-07-03, at 15:17:52 -0400, Eric Garver wrote: > On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 06:52:41PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 05:02:04PM +0100, Jeremy Sowden wrote: > > > At the beginning of the year you committed 34f085b16073 ("Revert > > > "xshared: Print protocol numbers if --numeric was given""), which > > > reverts da8ecc62dd76 ("xshared: Print protocol numbers if > > > --numeric was given"). > >=20 > > I did this in response to nfbz#1729[1] which argued the names are > > more descriptive. This is obviously true and since commit > > b6196c7504d4d there is no real downside to printing the name if > > available anymore (--numeric still prevents calls to > > getprotobynumber()). > >=20 > > Personally I don't mind that much about changing --list output as it > > is not well suited for parsing anyway. I assume most scripts use > > --list-rules or iptables-save output which wasn't affected by > > da8ecc62dd76. Of course I am aware of those that have to parse > > --list output for one or the other reason and their suffering. The > > only bright side here is that whoever had to adjust to da8ecc62dd76 > > will know how to adjust to 34f085b16073, too. Plus it's not a moving > > target as there are merely twelve names which remain in '-n -L' > > output. > >=20 > > > In response to a Debian bug-report: > > >=20 > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D1067733 > > >=20 > > > I applied the change to the iptables package and uploaded it. > > > However, this caused test failures in the Debian CI pipeline for > > > firewalld because its test-suite has been updated to expect the > > > new numeric protocol output. Michael Biebl, the firewalld Debian > > > maintainer, (cc'ed so he can correct me if I misquote him) raised > > > a point which I think has some merit. It is now eighteen months > > > since 1.8.9 was released. One imagines that the majority of > > > iptables users, who presumably are not building iptables directly > > > from git, must, therefore, have adjusted to the new output. Is > > > it, then, worth it to revert this change and force them to undo > > > that work after what may have been a couple of years by the time > > > 1.8.11 comes out? > > >=20 > > > What do you think? > >=20 > > I think it's a mess and there's no clean way out. The current code > > is at least consistent between '-S' and '-L' output (iptables-save > > should not be "less numeric" than '-n -L'). If it helps, I can work > > with Eric to solve the problem for firewalld so Michael will have > > something to backport to fix it. >=20 > The firewalld testuite failures have been fixed [1]. The revert > exposed a bug in the testsuite normalization. It's not actually caused > by the revert of iptables da8ecc62dd76. >=20 > Michael could backport this to Sid. >=20 > [1]: https://github.com/firewalld/firewalld/pull/1360 Michael has picked this up. > > All in all I have not seen many complaints about this change, I > > expect few people scraping iptables output and only a fraction doing > > --list. In addition to that, I plan on soon having a 1.8.11 release > > (we're far ahead already to make backports a pain). > >=20 > > What do you think? >=20 > I'm indifferent. As you say, there is no clean way out. Let's leave things as they are. Thanks for your time, all. J. --DXPQGkiBPCxlnzSi Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEbB20U2PvQDe9VtUXKYasCr3xBA0FAmaHA7IACgkQKYasCr3x BA0OUw/+JSObloszgej8YISFs0WAm7k9pLmqQkYdhSW1oZ5UhB8UCGUFg9jn3dEX D68gNI1niOAxASK3e2kcnxLb6flPJ0fm5OGpXt2Nld/uvUzwK/lLnCkWfI+s+ZBo BirNkiBBeJpu8R3Abf5EszhgK8kjP2FFUVTjMyD7VJCVvjcfq1S4qA2RDv+L9EKW MeLXoMv3TlrkHrRq5PgoTijcbZNvuynvqDf7XQc9x/TgCGeihBBViQTcfh3HDBL3 fgYQHBniKV5TucdabtOIMXiCPgX2Y5YECs4mj7gdKtcJXXZGKmFHZhjAhCzMMkuO OeEYVHlfxtNSTjJSL6mNzCCBsLZurYuCLSnrNvMtUNWr2UjfJ0/AQO08nIuHQrfl K5xKMktW9yqlbY3gJzO3K1Y15b6+BVYCYgH4MvAqa0Se2lc6jeJqvbZotMW8ljZp W73SNaNbY8rpor6YVZKbZs0P720Gvgys+B6E/sYe+KNJpfyriJpEkSA4w4fdW3/Q QU27MlSG3Dnv/c0Fq0Y4/yRTc2Lu9MHVFjKdOSEPctpqVpHkqg98VoJa6w3fZXJD 2Jt6BfUM1Mu4SwbeZ/G1kE/ATLcZrq/4/oQPk7LGDcgoIFsW6A7FIR76MKQSpEha AFe8XKRRHQ3rw+tRSPCNdWveO4GgBfileWTHHG3M3p3n9IFJCq8= =4siR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --DXPQGkiBPCxlnzSi--