Make port settings writable

[fisa4]

in /admin/settings_ports.php all ports that listen on the IP are not writable.
Only ports on localhost are writable.

It would be nice, if an admin can change all ports.
Maybe with a button to reset the settings to default.

[fisa4]

Solution:
in themes/omega_original/admin/settings_ports.tpl line 97

<input name="port[]" type="text" class="textinput" id="port{NUM}" style="width:50px" value="{PORT}" maxlength="5" {PORT_READONLY} />

remove {PORT_READONLY}

[benedikt]

this might be done with intention - and I know it has been. You can still deactivate the listing and add your own ports. If you create a "patch" for this, please provide a "reset to default" funtionality, too.

[nuxwin]

Hello ;

This answer follows on PM that I've received from fisa:

Ticket 2376
To: NuxWin
Hi Laurent,

is it ok for the "Reset to default"-Button to use JavaScript?
Example:
Code:
<Script type="text/javascript">
function resettodefault(){
document.form1.http.value = '80';
document.form1.ftp.value = '21';
document.form1.ssh.value = '22';
document.form1.postgrey.value = '60000';
document.form1.https.value = '443';
document.form1.imap.value = '143';
...
}
</Script>

<input type="button" value="Reset to default" onClick="javascript:resettodefault();">


or only a simple SQL-Statement to reset the settings to default?


Greets

Peter 

First, you should know that I have rewritten this script to use the new IspCP_Registry class and IspCP_ConfigHandler_Dd adapter class.

In my opinion, this ticket/patch has not real sense because the blocked ports for writing are only these that are provided by ispCP and should not be modified. All customs services ports and non-standard ports are already open for update.

To resume:

The HTTPS, DNS, IMAP, IMAP-SSL, POP3, POP3-SSL, SMTP, SMTP-SSL, SSH and TELNET ports should not be writable because they are standard ports. Any changes of them was not sense.

All other ports like SPAMASSASSIN, POLICYD-WEIGHT... are already open for update.

To conclude, I think this patch should be rejected and this ticket closed as 'invalid'

Cheer ;

[nuxwin]

Oups: I'll commit the new version of the settings_ports.php script ASAP

[nuxwin]

Ok, see the last trunk state for the new version.

[nuxwin]

Maybe the ssh port should be open for update.

[benedikt]

Replying to nuxwin:

In my opinion, this ticket/patch has not real sense because the blocked ports for writing are only these that are provided by ispCP and should not be modified. All customs services ports and non-standard ports are already open for update.

To resume:

The HTTPS, DNS, IMAP, IMAP-SSL, POP3, POP3-SSL, SMTP, SMTP-SSL, SSH and TELNET ports should not be writable because they are standard ports. Any changes of them was not sense.

I do not fully agree. In some NAT or testing environments you have to move e.g. HTTP Ports from 80 to 8080 and HTTPS from 443 to 8443. This is possible in the current setting (hide standard ports and add a new one). Maybe the deactivation does not make any real sense. But this is such a minor issue (compared with other open bugs) that we should decide fast and use an easy way.

My recommendation: open all ports or reject ticket.

[nuxwin]

Replying to benedikt:

Replying to nuxwin:

In my opinion, this ticket/patch has not real sense because the blocked ports for writing are only these that are provided by ispCP and should not be modified. All customs services ports and non-standard ports are already open for update.

To resume:

The HTTPS, DNS, IMAP, IMAP-SSL, POP3, POP3-SSL, SMTP, SMTP-SSL, SSH and TELNET ports should not be writable because they are standard ports. Any changes of them was not sense.

I do not fully agree. In some NAT or testing environments you have to move e.g. HTTP Ports from 80 to 8080 and HTTPS from 443 to 8443. This is possible in the current setting (hide standard ports and add a new one). Maybe the deactivation does not make any real sense. But this is such a minor issue (compared with other open bugs) that we should decide fast and use an easy way.

My recommendation: open all ports or reject ticket.

In my opinions, the current working version is sufficient. As Benedikt said , if the user want another port, it can hide the already defined and added a own custom one.

I close the ticket.

Benedikt: I know other tickets are more important, but I'm only a man, not a robot. Let me work with not pressure please.

[benedikt]

Replying to nuxwin:

Replying to benedikt:

Maybe the deactivation does not make any real sense. But this is such a minor issue (compared with other open bugs) that we should decide fast and use an easy way.

Benedikt: I know other tickets are more important, but I'm only a man, not a robot. Let me work with not pressure please.

I was just comparing this ticket with others. I was not talking about the speed of any developer working. Why should I attack one of you in such an insulting way?

[nuxwin]

Sorry but I've not talking about insults. You want not understand the reason of mind. Maybe my last post in our internal forum is more clear.