Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

track upstream ansible bug in ipv6() filter and revert workaround when fixed #80

Closed
nusenu opened this issue Oct 2, 2016 · 1 comment
Closed

track upstream ansible bug in ipv6() filter and revert workaround when fixed #80

nusenu opened this issue Oct 2, 2016 · 1 comment
Labels
ansible_bug upstream_bug workaround_applied

Comments

@nusenu
Copy link
Owner

nusenu commented Oct 2, 2016

ansible/ansible#14829

workaround commit:
9b1adbb
nusenu pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 19, 2017
revert previous workaround (9b1adbb), do not use ipv6('address') in v…
f7b70e1 
…6tmp instead (#80) we expect ansible_all_ipv6_addresses to consist of addresses only, filtering with ipv6('public') only should be fine
@nusenu
Copy link
Owner Author

nusenu commented Jan 26, 2017 •
edited
Loading

turns out ip('public') is broken as well (bug is only triggered on systems that have no IPv6 at all, not even link local addresses), so the commit f7b70e1 breaks the dev branch on targets without any IPv6 addresses

nusenu pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 28, 2017
add support for private IPv4 addresses (fixes #102)
1224adf 
Use public IPs only by default and fallback
to a single private IP in case we have no public IP.
Using public _and_ private IPv4 addresses at the same
time on a single host is not supported.

Fixes a bug where we created more than two
tor instances per public IPv4 address when the
host had private and public IPv4 addresses.

Variable 'tor_v4ips' can no longer be set since it is
potentially overwritten at runtime.

tor_maxips is replaced with tor_maxPublicIPs + tor_maxPrivateIPs

torrc: no longer include 'Address' line.

This would be simpler without bug ansible/ansible#14829 (#80).
@duelle duelle mentioned this issue May 20, 2017
Closed
@goll goll mentioned this issue Mar 2, 2019
Closed
@nusenu nusenu mentioned this issue Nov 3, 2020
Closed
@nusenu nusenu closed this as completed in b64b07d Jul 18, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
ansible_bug upstream_bug workaround_applied
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@nusenu