[libvirt] [PATCH] Use port range 5901-5999 if not set in qemu.conf, avoid port 5900
In order to avoid conflict with the default port (5900) for host VNC server (vino-server for example), or to conflict with X11 (starting at port 6000), restrict range of ports to 5901-5999 unless explicitly specified in qemu.conf. On the other hand, if port range is explicitly specified in qemu.conf, there is no reason not to allow ports 1024-5900 (system ports are below 1024). Addresses https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442235 Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com> --- src/qemu/qemu_conf.c | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c index 1b704da..07f3177 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c @@ -65,9 +65,15 @@ VIR_LOG_INIT("qemu.qemu_conf"); * This limitation is mentioned in qemu.conf, so bear in mind that the * configuration file should reflect any changes made to these values. */ -#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 5900 + +// Range of available ports - Avoid ports below 1024 (system ports) +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 1024 #define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX 65535 +// Default min and max if not configured in qemu.conf +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT 5901 +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT 5999 + #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MIN 5700 #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MAX 65535 @@ -283,8 +289,8 @@ virQEMUDriverConfigPtr virQEMUDriverConfigNew(bool privileged) #undef SET_TLS_X509_CERT_DEFAULT - cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN; - cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX; + cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT; + cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT; cfg->webSocketPortMin = QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MIN; cfg->webSocketPortMax = QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MAX; -- 2.9.3
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02:36 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
In order to avoid conflict with the default port (5900) for host VNC server (vino-server for example), or to conflict with X11 (starting at port 6000), restrict range of ports to 5901-5999 unless explicitly specified in qemu.conf.
On the other hand, if port range is explicitly specified in qemu.conf, there is no reason not to allow ports 1024-5900 (system ports are below 1024).
Addresses https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442235
Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com> --- src/qemu/qemu_conf.c | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c index 1b704da..07f3177 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c @@ -65,9 +65,15 @@ VIR_LOG_INIT("qemu.qemu_conf"); * This limitation is mentioned in qemu.conf, so bear in mind that the * configuration file should reflect any changes made to these values. */ -#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 5900 + +// Range of available ports - Avoid ports below 1024 (system ports)
We don't use single line comments.
+#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 1024
I don't think it's possible to use ports < 5900 due to the weird way you specify VNC "screens".
#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX 65535
+// Default min and max if not configured in qemu.conf +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT 5901 +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT 5999 + #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MIN 5700 #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MAX 65535
@@ -283,8 +289,8 @@ virQEMUDriverConfigPtr virQEMUDriverConfigNew(bool privileged)
#undef SET_TLS_X509_CERT_DEFAULT
- cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN; - cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX; + cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT; + cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT;
This can conflict basically with everything running on non-system ports. Additionally, we tend to shoot to support 4k VMs which would prevent to do so. Peter
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:20:11AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02:36 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
In order to avoid conflict with the default port (5900) for host VNC server (vino-server for example), or to conflict with X11 (starting at port 6000), restrict range of ports to 5901-5999 unless explicitly specified in qemu.conf.
On the other hand, if port range is explicitly specified in qemu.conf, there is no reason not to allow ports 1024-5900 (system ports are below 1024).
Addresses https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442235
Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com> --- src/qemu/qemu_conf.c | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c index 1b704da..07f3177 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c @@ -65,9 +65,15 @@ VIR_LOG_INIT("qemu.qemu_conf"); * This limitation is mentioned in qemu.conf, so bear in mind that the * configuration file should reflect any changes made to these values. */ -#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 5900 + +// Range of available ports - Avoid ports below 1024 (system ports)
We don't use single line comments.
+#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 1024
I don't think it's possible to use ports < 5900 due to the weird way you specify VNC "screens".
#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX 65535
+// Default min and max if not configured in qemu.conf +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT 5901 +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT 5999 + #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MIN 5700 #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MAX 65535
@@ -283,8 +289,8 @@ virQEMUDriverConfigPtr virQEMUDriverConfigNew(bool privileged)
#undef SET_TLS_X509_CERT_DEFAULT
- cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN; - cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX; + cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT; + cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT;
This can conflict basically with everything running on non-system ports. Additionally, we tend to shoot to support 4k VMs which would prevent to do so.
I'm not really convinced we want to change anything here. Typical desktop virt usage via GNOME Boxes would be using session mode libvirt and so any auto-started VMs would happen after Vino has already claimed port 5900. The privileged libvirtd is targetted at server virt usage where you would not have a desktop installed on the same machine. In remaining scenarios its already possible to just edit qemu.conf to tweak local setup as desired. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:26:09AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:20:11AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02:36 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
In order to avoid conflict with the default port (5900) for host VNC server (vino-server for example), or to conflict with X11 (starting at port 6000), restrict range of ports to 5901-5999 unless explicitly specified in qemu.conf.
On the other hand, if port range is explicitly specified in qemu.conf, there is no reason not to allow ports 1024-5900 (system ports are below 1024).
Addresses https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442235
Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com> --- src/qemu/qemu_conf.c | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c index 1b704da..07f3177 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c @@ -65,9 +65,15 @@ VIR_LOG_INIT("qemu.qemu_conf"); * This limitation is mentioned in qemu.conf, so bear in mind that the * configuration file should reflect any changes made to these values. */ -#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 5900 + +// Range of available ports - Avoid ports below 1024 (system ports)
We don't use single line comments.
+#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 1024
I don't think it's possible to use ports < 5900 due to the weird way you specify VNC "screens".
#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX 65535
+// Default min and max if not configured in qemu.conf +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT 5901 +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT 5999 + #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MIN 5700 #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MAX 65535
@@ -283,8 +289,8 @@ virQEMUDriverConfigPtr virQEMUDriverConfigNew(bool privileged)
#undef SET_TLS_X509_CERT_DEFAULT
- cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN; - cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX; + cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT; + cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT;
This can conflict basically with everything running on non-system ports. Additionally, we tend to shoot to support 4k VMs which would prevent to do so.
I'm not really convinced we want to change anything here. Typical desktop virt usage via GNOME Boxes would be using session mode libvirt and so any auto-started VMs would happen after Vino has already claimed port 5900. The privileged libvirtd is targetted at server virt usage where you would not have a desktop installed on the same machine. In remaining scenarios its already possible to just edit qemu.conf to tweak local setup as desired.
A reminder from the past - we first introduced this qemu.conf setting for the VNC port, in direct response to the same issue wrt to Vino. When we did that we explicitly decided to *keep* 5900 as the first port we start from, in order to avoid a semantic change to existing users of QEMU. ie we don't want a libvirt upgrade to renumber all VNC ports for existing deployed VMs, because this has non-trivial chance of breaking some existing deployments. eg user has 10 VMs on their host, and they've opened ports 5900-5909 in their firewall. If we change first port to 5901, that user will loose access to one of their VMs until they change their firewall settings to match. Given that this is the 1st time we had this complaint about Vino and QEMU reappear since we added these qemu.conf settings in 2012, I don't think we should change anything. We would be fixing a problem for small set of users exchange for creating problems for other users. The qemu.conf setting is a suitable workaround for when people do hit this problem. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
On 21 Apr 2017, at 11:26, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:20:11AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02:36 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
In order to avoid conflict with the default port (5900) for host VNC server (vino-server for example), or to conflict with X11 (starting at port 6000), restrict range of ports to 5901-5999 unless explicitly specified in qemu.conf.
On the other hand, if port range is explicitly specified in qemu.conf, there is no reason not to allow ports 1024-5900 (system ports are below 1024).
Addresses https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442235
Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com> --- src/qemu/qemu_conf.c | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c index 1b704da..07f3177 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c @@ -65,9 +65,15 @@ VIR_LOG_INIT("qemu.qemu_conf"); * This limitation is mentioned in qemu.conf, so bear in mind that the * configuration file should reflect any changes made to these values. */ -#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 5900 + +// Range of available ports - Avoid ports below 1024 (system ports)
We don't use single line comments.
+#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 1024
I don't think it's possible to use ports < 5900 due to the weird way you specify VNC "screens".
#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX 65535
+// Default min and max if not configured in qemu.conf +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT 5901 +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT 5999 + #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MIN 5700 #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MAX 65535
@@ -283,8 +289,8 @@ virQEMUDriverConfigPtr virQEMUDriverConfigNew(bool privileged)
#undef SET_TLS_X509_CERT_DEFAULT
- cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN; - cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX; + cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT; + cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT;
This can conflict basically with everything running on non-system ports. Additionally, we tend to shoot to support 4k VMs which would prevent to do so.
I'm not really convinced we want to change anything here. Typical desktop virt usage via GNOME Boxes would be using session mode libvirt and so any auto-started VMs would happen after Vino has already claimed port 5900.
There are too many limitations with session-mode VMs, like not being able to connect to them easily from outside. I also disagree with you assessment of “typical”. I have three auto-start VMs for my build ring (basically, Linux, Windows and macOS). Because they are part of a build ring, I need to be able to connect to them from outside (Jenkins launches jobs on them). I don’t see that setup as outlandish for the typical open-source developer.
The privileged libvirtd is targetted at server virt usage where you would not have a desktop installed on the same machine. In remaining scenarios its already possible to just edit qemu.conf to tweak local setup as desired.
My objection is to require tweaks to qemu.conf from the less experienced users so that the more advanced sysadmins don’t have to… Regards, Christophe
Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com <https://berrange.com/> -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange <https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange> :| |: https://libvirt.org <https://libvirt.org/> -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com <https://fstop138.berrange.com/> :| |: https://entangle-photo.org <https://entangle-photo.org/> -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange <https://www.instagram.com/dberrange> :|
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com <mailto:libvir-list@redhat.com> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list>
On 21 Apr 2017, at 11:20, Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:02:36 +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
In order to avoid conflict with the default port (5900) for host VNC server (vino-server for example), or to conflict with X11 (starting at port 6000), restrict range of ports to 5901-5999 unless explicitly specified in qemu.conf.
On the other hand, if port range is explicitly specified in qemu.conf, there is no reason not to allow ports 1024-5900 (system ports are below 1024).
Addresses https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442235
Signed-off-by: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com> --- src/qemu/qemu_conf.c | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c index 1b704da..07f3177 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c @@ -65,9 +65,15 @@ VIR_LOG_INIT("qemu.qemu_conf"); * This limitation is mentioned in qemu.conf, so bear in mind that the * configuration file should reflect any changes made to these values. */ -#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 5900 + +// Range of available ports - Avoid ports below 1024 (system ports)
We don't use single line comments.
OK. I will change that. Ah, 1990s nostalgia! ;-)
+#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN 1024
I don't think it's possible to use ports < 5900 due to the weird way you specify VNC "screens”.
I considered that. But there are many use cases where you specify port manually, so this could be a feature. For example, you could manually assign ports in the range 5900-5999 for “front-end” VMs, with a convenient display number, but let “back-end VMs” be assigned automatically elsewhere, so that they don’t steal ports. That means administering a back-end VM would require you to use an explicit port number, but for normal users, they would access a front-end VM and just use a display number. I don’t know if that makes sense or not. This could be a separate patch too. It’s not really the same problem after all.
#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX 65535
+// Default min and max if not configured in qemu.conf +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT 5901 +#define QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT 5999 + #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MIN 5700 #define QEMU_WEBSOCKET_PORT_MAX 65535
@@ -283,8 +289,8 @@ virQEMUDriverConfigPtr virQEMUDriverConfigNew(bool privileged)
#undef SET_TLS_X509_CERT_DEFAULT
- cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN; - cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX; + cfg->remotePortMin = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MIN_DEFAULT; + cfg->remotePortMax = QEMU_REMOTE_PORT_MAX_DEFAULT;
This can conflict basically with everything running on non-system ports.
This default range is 5901-5999, so this would not conflict with anything running on non-system ports, unless you specify that in qemu.conf (but then you know what you are doing)
Additionally, we tend to shoot to support 4k VMs which would prevent to do so.
I’m not sure I understood your comment. Do you mean 4000 VMs running concurrently, or 4K display? For the latter, I don’t see how port assignment matters, so I deduce you talk about running more than 99 VMs simultaneously. Can you do that without tweaks to qemu.conf? It’s really a trade-off. Experienced sysadmins will have to extend available ports in qemu.conf (and I place anybody running more than 100 VMs on a single system in that category). Regular users won’t have conflicts with vino-server or (if über-unlucky) X11. That seems like a reasonable trade-off to me. BTW, if you really run 4K VMs on a single host, assigning one port per VM for display will become a problem anyway. There are only 64K ports available, so using 4K just for displays does not scale well, not even counting the ports you might need for the VM workloads themselves. It might be time to think about adding a VM ID directly in the protocol and having multiple connections to the same port. Christophe
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:43:52AM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
BTW, if you really run 4K VMs on a single host, assigning one port per VM for display will become a problem anyway. There are only 64K ports available, so using 4K just for displays does not scale well, not even counting the ports you might need for the VM workloads themselves. It might be time to think about adding a VM ID directly in the protocol and having multiple connections to the same port.
4k ports for VNC still leaves 60k for other services, which allows another 17 ports per QEMU instance. The only way you're going to hit that limit with 4k VMs is if you run the in-QEMU RBD client against a ceph server that has lots of monitor hosts, at which point avoiding 4k ports from VNC is going to have negligble benefit. So there's no real problem here for common deployments. If VNC were to be a problem though you would just put QEMU VNC onto a UNIX socket, and run a websockets proxy to expose the VNC servers over a single HTTP service. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
participants (3)
-
Christophe de Dinechin -
Daniel P. Berrange -
Peter Krempa