Not correct work with 2 ipset argument. My rules like
-A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -m set --match-set usr src -m set ! --match-set ignore dst -j REDIRECT --to-ports 3129
Webmin not correct save such rules
Open added rule (-A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -m set --match-set usr src -m set ! --match-set ignore dst -j REDIRECT --to-ports 3129) and press save
press Apply Configuration
Getting Error "iptables-restore v1.6.0: --match-set can be specified only once
Error occurred at line: 60
Try iptables-restore -h or iptables-restore --help for more information."
If openned /etc/iptables.restore we see rules like -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp -m set --dport 443 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 3129 --match-set usr src ! --match-set ignore dst
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Ok, that's surprising - due to the way the iptables module is written currently, fixing this won't be easy (it assumes that parameter order doesn't matter)
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
What does Webmin do to rules like this exactly?
-A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -m set --match-set usr src -m set ! --match-set ignore dst -j REDIRECT --to-ports 3129) and press save"iptables-restore v1.6.0: --match-set can be specified only once Error occurred at line: 60 Try iptables-restore -h or iptables-restore --help for more information."If openned /etc/iptables.restore we see rules like
-A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp -m set --dport 443 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 3129 --match-set usr src ! --match-set ignore dstThat's unusual - so the difference appears to be that
-m setneeds to be listed before each use of--match-set?Yes, I think so.
Ok, that's surprising - due to the way the iptables module is written currently, fixing this won't be easy (it assumes that parameter order doesn't matter)
Any news?
Fix is still pending, due to the complexity of the code change.
Hi! No news?
The bug was opened 3 years ago. No news?
No, in practice we aren't going to be able to fix this any time soon as it would involve a re-write of the whole UI for the iptables module.