Bug#398739: attachment

2006-11-15 Thread martin f krafft
Oops. Now attached. -- .''`. martin f. krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems # Fail2Ban configuration

Bug#398739: attachment

2006-11-15 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
I believe that you mixed up interpolations (done but pythons config module) and substitutions done by fail2ban actionstart = iptables -N fail2ban-name iptables -I fwchain -m state --state NEW -p protocol --dport port -j fail2ban-name post_start_commands I don't think

Bug#398739: Re: Bug#398739: attachment

2006-11-15 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Yaroslav Halchenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.11.15.1512 +0100]: I believe that you mixed up interpolations (done but pythons config module) and substitutions done by fail2ban actionstart = iptables -N fail2ban-name iptables -I fwchain -m state --state NEW -p

Bug#398739: Re: Bug#398739: attachment

2006-11-15 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
it is hard to see whole picture since you are just sending changing snippets of configuration - send the whole entirety... I bet that the reason for current issue is that you defined actionstart in [Definition] config/action.d/iptables.conf whenever you defined in post_start_commands in [Init]

Bug#398739: Re: Re: Bug#398739: attachment

2006-11-15 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Yaroslav Halchenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.11.15.1655 +0100]: it is hard to see whole picture since you are just sending changing snippets of configuration - send the whole entirety... I did. And it's not changing. Again, without comments: == /etc/fail2ban/jail.local == [DEFAULT]

Bug#398739: Re: Re: Re: Bug#398739: attachment

2006-11-15 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Yaroslav Halchenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.11.15.1854 +0100]: Please find my fix to your configuration attached... We're going in circles... almost. If you now look at the original configuration I submitted, it's almost exactly the same as the one you have given me, except that you

Bug#398739: Re: Re: Bug#398739: attachment

2006-11-15 Thread Yaroslav Halchenko
Dear Martin, ok - I see now more clearly but the reason is the same: confusion between interpolated values and substituted by fail2ban (which is a limited set of names). so whenever you provide parameters for action like iptables[bla=zzz] bla has to be handled as fail2ban config parameter (the

Bug#398739: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bug#398739: attachment

2006-11-15 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.11.15.1917 +0100]: So what is the Init section for? I wish I could just define defaults in the action file and still have them be overrideable from the jail configuration. If we figure out a better way to set the defaults, you're of course

Bug#398739: attachment

2006-11-15 Thread martin f krafft
Thanks, both of you, for your time and patience! also sprach Cyril Jaquier [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.11.15.2302 +0100]: Any option my_option in the section [Init] can then be replaced by a tag my_option in the section [Definition] of the action. The tag my_option will then be replaced by the