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.

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

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

inbound_rule / outbound_rule port leads to unstable state #2467

Open
jlaine opened this issue Mar 20, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

inbound_rule / outbound_rule port leads to unstable state #2467

jlaine opened this issue Mar 20, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug instance Instance issues, bugs and feature requests priority:highest Bugs filled by customers, security issues

Comments

@jlaine
Copy link

jlaine commented Mar 20, 2024

Community Note

  • Please vote on this issue by adding a 馃憤 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
  • Please do not leave "+1" or other comments that do not add relevant new information or questions, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
  • If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

Terraform Version

Terraform v1.7.5
on linux_amd64

  • provider registry.terraform.io/scaleway/scaleway v2.38.2

Affected Resource(s)

  • scaleway_instance_security_group

Terraform Configuration Files

resource "scaleway_instance_security_group" "voip" {
  ...

  outbound_rule {
      action = "accept"
      protocol = "UDP"
      port = 5060
  }
}

Expected Behavior

Applying the plan then running terraform plan should report the infrastructure matches the configuration.

Actual Behavior

Instead, we end up with a plan which wants to update the infrastructure, at least for ports above 1024.

Changing port to port_range = "5060-5060" seems to work around the issue.

@Codelax Codelax added bug instance Instance issues, bugs and feature requests labels Mar 21, 2024
@Codelax
Copy link
Member

Codelax commented Mar 25, 2024

Hi,
I tried to reproduce using your snippet but I did not have any issue.
Do you have any other rule in your security group that could trigger this unexpected plan ?

@jlaine
Copy link
Author

jlaine commented Mar 27, 2024

@rbarrois any insights here?

@remyleone remyleone added the priority:highest Bugs filled by customers, security issues label Jun 4, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug instance Instance issues, bugs and feature requests priority:highest Bugs filled by customers, security issues
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants