You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am trying to implement rate limiting with iptables, which uses recent and mask options in iptables. The module allows such configuration for IPv4, but not IPv6. On IPv6 it would require rules like that:
The problem is that the module does not support recent/mask for IPv6, only for IPv4. The mask type is defined as Optional[Pattern[/^\d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+$/]] and would not accept the IPv6 values.
Describe the Solution You Would Like
Change mask type allowing both IPv4 and IPv6 values.
Describe Alternatives You've Considered
Of course, there are alternative ways of rate limiting not using iptables, but that is the best fit for a few projects I've got.
Additional Context
Interestingly this limitation to just IPv4 values of the mask has been introduced in version 7 of the module. Before that IPv6 masks were accepted. Thus this request is not so much about adding a new feature as bringing back an old one.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Use Case
I am trying to implement rate limiting with iptables, which uses recent and mask options in iptables. The module allows such configuration for IPv4, but not IPv6. On IPv6 it would require rules like that:
The problem is that the module does not support recent/mask for IPv6, only for IPv4. The mask type is defined as
Optional[Pattern[/^\d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+$/]]
and would not accept the IPv6 values.Describe the Solution You Would Like
Change mask type allowing both IPv4 and IPv6 values.
Describe Alternatives You've Considered
Of course, there are alternative ways of rate limiting not using iptables, but that is the best fit for a few projects I've got.
Additional Context
Interestingly this limitation to just IPv4 values of the mask has been introduced in version 7 of the module. Before that IPv6 masks were accepted. Thus this request is not so much about adding a new feature as bringing back an old one.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: