Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I was updating my iptables in CentOS 6.4

I added port 8080 to iptables and ran iptables save. However now when I view my iptables all it is showing me is:

# Generated by iptables-save v1.4.7 on Wed Apr  9 13:46:25 2014
*filter
:INPUT ACCEPT [135:9225]
:FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [85:12488]
COMMIT
# Completed on Wed Apr  9 13:46:25 2014

Is this a summarised view or have I saved my iptables horribly wrong?

iptables -L -n -v

Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 177 packets, 14590 bytes)
  pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination

Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) 
  pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 

Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 135 packets, 22979 bytes) 
  pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 
share|improve this question

closed as off-topic by Iain, Jacob, Andrew, MadHatter, mdpc Apr 9 at 18:13

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Questions must demonstrate a minimal understanding of the problem being solved. Try including attempted solutions, why they didn't work, and the expected results. See How can I ask better questions on Server Fault? for further guidance." – Iain, Jacob, Andrew, MadHatter
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

    
What is the output for iptables -L -n -v ? –  krisFR Apr 9 at 4:01
    
Not much: Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 177 packets, 14590 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 135 packets, 22979 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination –  Max Apr 9 at 4:42
    
I have updated your question with this. Seems that your rules are not here...How did you setup them ? If you saved them with iptables-save try to restore them with iptables-restore –  krisFR Apr 9 at 4:59
    
Used vi to edit the iptables and then :wq However I saw another user suggested using iptables save so I ran that. Now it is like this –  Max Apr 9 at 5:01
    
So you have a script to manage your iptables rules ? well, run it –  krisFR Apr 9 at 5:04

2 Answers 2

Using iptables-save without arguments will output all rules directly from the kernel. If it shows no rules, I would trust that you really do not have any rules. What command did you use to add a rule? What did you do after that, before running iptables-save?

share|improve this answer
    
Yes I used it without arguments. I used vi and inserted rules in the iptables file. Didn't do anything between than and iptables save (no dash) –  Max Apr 9 at 6:51
    
Then you need to load that file; in it's simplest form: iptables-restore < /path/to/file/you/edited –  fukawi2 Apr 9 at 7:05
    
So you did not even load the updated iptables file into the kernel? That would explain why the rule is not in the kernel. I think the command to load it like it happens during boot would be service iptables start, but it may be better to use iptables-restore < filename to load it. Remember that if you are doing this over a network connection, you could potentially kick yourself off the machine, so be careful. –  kasperd Apr 9 at 7:08
    
I've always edited the file directly and saved in vi. Is that incorrect? –  Max Apr 10 at 2:44
    
Red Hat Linux would load rules from /etc/sysconfig/iptables at boot. The same probably applies to many of the distributions based on Red Hat Linux. –  kasperd Apr 10 at 6:05

The persistent iptable rules for CentOS6 is stored under /etc/sysconfig/iptables. iptables-save will print out rules to STDOUT which is not what you want.

If you make changes to running iptables config and would like to make those persistent, then instead of running iptables-save, do

/sbin/service iptables save
share|improve this answer
    
See my comment and the OPs reply - it looks like this is just what they did. –  Iain Apr 9 at 7:55
    
OK then it should just work, unless there were syntax errors in the iptables rule to add,or if the save command was run with insufficient perms. –  Petter H Apr 9 at 8:06
    
It looks like the OP didn't have any rules loaded. They edited their /etc/sysconfig/iptables file, then ran service iptables save and overwrote their rules ::shurgs:: –  Iain Apr 9 at 8:11
    
that would explain the observed behaviour. –  Petter H Apr 9 at 8:14

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.