search for: lockingopt

...ord.edu>, Eriksson, Thomas <thomas.eriksson at slac.stanford.edu> wrote: > This should probably be a bug report for the fail2ban EPEL maintainer, the problem was introduced in version 0.9.3 > > >From the file /etc/fail2ban/action.d/iptables-common.conf > ... > # Option: lockingopt > # Notes.: Option was introduced to iptables to prevent multiple instances from > # running concurrently and causing irratic behavior. -w was introduced > # in iptables 1.4.20, so might be absent on older systems > # See https://github.com/fail2ban/fail2ban...

On a CentOS 6.7 system that's been running fail2ban for a long time, we recently started seeing this: ct 28 19:00:59 <servername> fail2ban.action[17561]: ERROR iptables -w -D INPUT -p tcp --dport ssh -j f2b-SSH#012iptables -w -F f2b-SSH#012iptables -w -X f2b-SSH -- stderr: "iptables v1.4.7: option `-w' requires an argument\nTry `iptables -h' or 'iptables --help' for

This should probably be a bug report for the fail2ban EPEL maintainer, the problem was introduced in version 0.9.3 >From the file /etc/fail2ban/action.d/iptables-common.conf ... # Option: lockingopt # Notes.: Option was introduced to iptables to prevent multiple instances from # running concurrently and causing irratic behavior. -w was introduced # in iptables 1.4.20, so might be absent on older systems # See https://github.com/fail2ban/fail2ban/issues/1122 # Value...