On 1/26/19 6:24 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > I'm 99% sure it has something to do with the firewall. Thing is, I > haven't touched the firewall rules. Nevertheless I see this: > > $ systemctl status firewalld > ● firewalld.service - firewalld - dynamic firewall daemon > Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/firewalld.service; enabled; vendor preset: enabled) > Active: active (running) since Fri 2019-01-25 21:37:32 GMT; 42min ago > Docs: man:firewalld(1) > Main PID: 2421 (firewalld) > Tasks: 3 (limit: 4915) > Memory: 28.2M > CGroup: /system.slice/firewalld.service > └─2421 /usr/bin/python3 /usr/sbin/firewalld --nofork --nopid > > Jan 25 21:37:32 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete FORWARD --destination 192.168.122.0/24 --out-in> > Jan 25 21:37:32 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete FORWARD --source 192.168.122.0/24 --in-interfac> > Jan 25 21:37:32 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete FORWARD --in-interface virbr0 --out-interface v> > Jan 25 21:37:32 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete FORWARD --out-interface virbr0 --jump REJECT' f> > Jan 25 21:37:32 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete FORWARD --in-interface virbr0 --jump REJECT' fa> > Jan 25 21:37:32 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete INPUT --in-interface virbr0 --protocol udp --de> > Jan 25 21:37:32 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete INPUT --in-interface virbr0 --protocol tcp --de> > Jan 25 21:37:33 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete OUTPUT --out-interface virbr0 --protocol udp --> > Jan 25 21:37:33 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete INPUT --in-interface virbr0 --protocol udp --de> > Jan 25 21:37:33 bree firewalld[2421]: WARNING: COMMAND_FAILED: '/usr/sbin/iptables -w10 -w --table filter --delete INPUT --in-interface virbr0 --protocol tcp --de> > > I tried reloading firewalld and got the same result. I fired up the > firewall applet and suddenly the guests had network access, even though > I didn't change anything. I quit the applet and boom, the guests lost > network access again. Fired it up once more, but this time the guest > access didn't come back. > > I don't know if any of this is repeatable. Time to slaughter a chicken > by the light of the moon? Well, my next suggestion was going to be to disable the firewall as a test. But, I must admit that I was hesitant to suggest that since DHCP seems to have worked. I just now installed F29 Workstation in a guest using virtio and it is working just fine. FWIW, I only have vnet0 and no vnet1. No errors show in firewalld status. virbr0 and vnet0 both show as being in the Default Zone: public in the firewall configuration under "Connections". I have no Rich Rules defined. [egreshko@meimei ~]$ ping 192.168.122.86 PING 192.168.122.86 (192.168.122.86) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.122.86: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.238 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.122.86: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.251 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.122.86: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.377 ms -- Right: I dislike the default color scheme Wrong: What idiot picked the default color scheme _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
