As long as it is unique. But for now I want to keep things simple. We
just need to decide if we move from position based arguments to named
arguments.
Yes, keep it simple
in ACCEPT(MACRO) -i net0 -source 192.168.2.0 -dest 1.2.3.4 -p tcp -dport 80 -
sport 20
Ok, will go that way ;-)
Have you had the time to review my patch to QemuServer.pm?
Subject for patch: [PATCH 1/1] add initiator-name to iscsi drives if
configured
Just applied the patch, but changed it slightly to avoid multiple '-iscsi'
option if a
VM has more than one iscsi drive:
After considerations I have come to the conclusion that this is intentional
since
the lock is controlled higher up in the chain of commands (QemuServer.pm).
This is therefore no bug. I consider the waiting patches ready for inclusion.
Please can you send me the exactly list of patches
Hi Dietmar,
On Sat, 17 May 2014 07:29:05 +
Dietmar Maurer diet...@proxmox.com wrote:
Just applied the patch, but changed it slightly to avoid multiple '-iscsi'
option if a
VM has more than one iscsi drive:
Yes, thought about that.
I guess it will not harm if we always add '-iscsi'
On Sat, 17 May 2014 07:31:16 +
Dietmar Maurer diet...@proxmox.com wrote:
Please can you send me the exactly list of patches (what exactly is ready for
inclusion)?
This are the patches ready for inclusion:
commit b3a716fa613391dc54244f7a894088de36b6a303
commit
Hi,
I was looking to macros, and I see that somes are birectionnal.
But that doesn't make any sense with our firewall, because we choose the
direction of rules (tap-in|tap-out).
So they never can apply both direction.
(I think it's easier for user to implement 1 rule for in and 1 rule for
