[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9317?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15409211#comment-15409211
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on CLOUDSTACK-9317:
--------------------------------------------
Github user ProjectMoon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1623#discussion_r73664374
--- Diff: server/src/com/cloud/network/IpAddressManagerImpl.java ---
@@ -1698,6 +1698,22 @@ public String acquireGuestIpAddress(Network network,
String requestedIp) {
Random _rand = new Random(System.currentTimeMillis());
+ /**
+ * Get the list of public IPs that need to be applied for a static NAT
enable/disable operation.
+ * Manipulating only these ips prevents concurrency issues when
disabling static nat at the same time.
+ * @param staticNats
+ * @return The list of IPs that need to be applied for the static NAT
to work.
+ */
+ public List<IPAddressVO> getStaticNatSourceIps(List<? extends
StaticNat> staticNats) {
+ List<IPAddressVO> userIps = new ArrayList<>();
+
+ for (StaticNat snat : staticNats) {
+
userIps.add(_ipAddressDao.findById(snat.getSourceIpAddressId()));
+ }
--- End diff --
This makes sense, yes. Better to have one database query than many.
> Disabling static NAT on many IPs can leave wrong IPs on the router
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CLOUDSTACK-9317
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9317
> Project: CloudStack
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the
> default.)
> Components: Management Server, Virtual Router
> Affects Versions: 4.7.0, 4.7.1, 4.7.2
> Reporter: Jeff Hair
>
> The current behavior of enabling or disabling static NAT will call the apply
> IP associations method in the management server. The method is not
> thread-safe. If it's called from multiple threads, each thread will load up
> the list of public IPs in different states (add or revoke)--correct for the
> thread, but not correct overall. Depending on execution order on the virtual
> router, the router can end up with public IPs assigned to it that are not
> supposed to be on it anymore. When another account acquires the same IP, this
> of course leads to network problems.
> The problem has been in CS since at least 4.2, and likely affects all
> recently released versions. Affected version is set to 4.7.x because that's
> what we verified against.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
