Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make it possible to update Firewall Rules #134

Open
MaikelBornSentia opened this issue Nov 24, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

Make it possible to update Firewall Rules #134

MaikelBornSentia opened this issue Nov 24, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@MaikelBornSentia
Copy link

The rulle is as following:

Before
class role_*****_pw::firewallrules
{
windows_firewall::exception{'Puppet Allow Remote Desktop ***** TCP-In':
ensure => present,
direction => 'in',
action => 'allow',
enabled => true,
protocol => 'TCP',
local_port => '3389',
remote_port => 'any',
remote_ip => '"x.x.x.x","y.y.y.y"',
display_name => 'Puppet Allow Remote Desktop - TCP-In',
description => '**** Allow Remote Desktop - TCP-In',
}

After
class role_*****_pw::firewallrules
{
windows_firewall::exception{'Puppet Allow Remote Desktop ***** TCP-In':
ensure => present,
direction => 'in',
action => 'allow',
enabled => true,
protocol => 'TCP',
local_port => '3389',
remote_port => 'any',
remote_ip => '"x.x.x.x","y.y.y.y","z.z.z.z"',
display_name => 'Puppet Allow Remote Desktop - TCP-In',
description => '**** Allow Remote Desktop - TCP-In',
}

How to reproduce (e.g Puppet code you use)

Create a firewall rule then add another IP after adding it

What are you seeing

When we delete the rule from the server and run puppet this is working however when we add another IP to the rule in puppet the firewall rule doesnt get update after a puppet run.

What behaviour did you expect instead

We expect the rule to be update after a puppet run if we have changes in them.

Any additional information you'd like to impart

Feel free to contact me to explain this some more.

@foxhunt72
Copy link

could this be fixed with #132 ??

@RamblingCookieMonster
Copy link

For what it's worth, this seems to be sort of a critical part of what this module should provide, no? One tends not to care as much about the name of a firewall rule, as for the actual functionality of the rule that is being ignored here?

@unkinected
Copy link

Almost two years on this bug and no updates? As stated earlier this seems pretty crucial. Is this a dead project? Should I look for another module?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants