From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ken Dreyer Subject: Re: firewall questions Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 14:33:36 -0600 Message-ID: <555E4120.2040603@redhat.com> References: <555CE992.10703@redhat.com> <555DFB71.6050602@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45140 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756505AbbEUUdh (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2015 16:33:37 -0400 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A02FA10A7 for ; Thu, 21 May 2015 20:33:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mbp.ktdreyer.com (vpn-62-245.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.62.245]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t4LKXa6X014226 for ; Thu, 21 May 2015 16:33:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" On 05/21/2015 09:37 AM, Sage Weil wrote: > On Thu, 21 May 2015, Ken Dreyer wrote: >> I think that would mean we'd want to open 6800-7300 by default? >> >> And for this firewalld service name, I was thinking of naming this >> 6800-7300 rule "ceph", since it encompasses both the OSD and MDS >> services. Does that name sound ok? (And I'd name the 6789 rule "ceph-mon".) > > Yep, sounds good to me! > Cool. New Ceph configs submitted to firewalld at https://github.com/t-woerner/firewalld/pull/22 I've also updated our own docs re: iptables, at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/4740 - Ken