)]}'
{"neutron/agent/linux/iptables_firewall.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":10257,"name":"Sridhar Gaddam","email":"sgaddam@redhat.com","username":"sridhargaddam"},"change_message_id":"e47961145939a639be2fd31dc7ceb81aede04974","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":248,"context_line":"        #Note(nati) allow dhcp or RA packet"},{"line_number":249,"context_line":"        ipv4_rules +\u003d [comment_rule(\u0027-p udp -m udp --sport 68 --dport 67 \u0027"},{"line_number":250,"context_line":"                                    \u0027-j RETURN\u0027, comment\u003dic.DHCP_CLIENT)]"},{"line_number":251,"context_line":"        ipv6_rules +\u003d [comment_rule(\u0027-p icmpv6 -j ACCEPT\u0027,"},{"line_number":252,"context_line":"                                    comment\u003dic.IPV6_RA_ALLOW)]"},{"line_number":253,"context_line":"        ipv6_rules +\u003d [comment_rule(\u0027-p udp -m udp --sport 546 --dport 547 \u0027"},{"line_number":254,"context_line":"                                    \u0027-j ACCEPT\u0027, comment\u003dNone)]"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3a961159_5078b7c3","line":251,"updated":"2015-01-08 07:35:59.000000000","message":"@Soumya, you are changing the target of the rule from RETURN to ACCEPT. This is not required as the default target in the parent chain is ACCEPT - hence the packet would be allowed anyways.\n\nIMHO, this patch is not required.\n\nAlso JFYI,\n1. You seem to add some new ipv6 rules below. The current rule is a generic rule and will accept all the ICMPV6 types. So the rules you have added below will not be hit. \n\n2. This is a spoofing rule, i.e., it would hit for traffic going out of the VM (egress traffic and not ingress traffic).","commit_id":"b86647afc2a2adcc74451fc40bcc6f43f6dffd91"}],"neutron/common/constants.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":4656,"name":"Sean M. Collins","email":"sean@coreitpro.com","username":"scollins"},"change_message_id":"1ec0d36010f5a007a7b04ee142b7e7ef959c481b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":121,"context_line":"# Router Advertisement (134),"},{"line_number":122,"context_line":"# Neighbor Solicitation (135),"},{"line_number":123,"context_line":"# Neighbor Advertisement (136)"},{"line_number":124,"context_line":"ICMPV6_ALLOWED_TYPES \u003d [130, 131, 132, 134, 135, 136]"},{"line_number":125,"context_line":"ICMPV6_TYPE_RA \u003d 134"},{"line_number":126,"context_line":""},{"line_number":127,"context_line":"DHCPV6_STATEFUL \u003d \u0027dhcpv6-stateful\u0027"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3a961159_5676c1a4","line":124,"updated":"2015-01-09 18:36:41.000000000","message":"On the first level, why are you adding 134 to this list when it\u0027s defined as it\u0027s own constant?\n\nSecondly, and this is more of a style objection, why would you not use the constant?","commit_id":"b86647afc2a2adcc74451fc40bcc6f43f6dffd91"}]}