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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Insights settings for proxy/firewall #3654

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AkshayGadhaveRH
Copy link
Contributor

In order to use Insights with a proxy or firewall, users need to configure connections for both console.redhat.com and cert.console.redhat.com. Added these missing entries to the Ports and Firewall requirements and Hostnames for HTTP proxy tables.

JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-30953

What changes are you introducing?

Why are you introducing these changes? (Explanation, links to references, issues, etc.)

Anything else to add? (Considerations, potential downsides, alternative solutions you have explored, etc.)

Checklists

  • I am okay with my commits getting squashed when you merge this PR.
  • I am familiar with the contributing guidelines.

Please cherry-pick my commits into:

  • Foreman 3.13/Katello 4.15 (EL9 only)
  • Foreman 3.12/Katello 4.14 (Satellite 6.16)
  • Foreman 3.11/Katello 4.13 (orcharhino 6.11 on EL8 only; orcharhino 7.0 on EL8+EL9)
  • Foreman 3.10/Katello 4.12
  • Foreman 3.9/Katello 4.11 (Satellite 6.15; orcharhino 6.8/6.9/6.10)
  • Foreman 3.8/Katello 4.10
  • Foreman 3.7/Katello 4.9 (Satellite 6.14)
  • We do not accept PRs for Foreman older than 3.7.

In order to use Insights with a proxy or firewall, users need to configure connections for both console.redhat.com and cert.console.redhat.com.
Added these missing entries to the `Ports and Firewall requirements` and `Hostnames for HTTP proxy` tables.

JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-30953
@github-actions github-actions bot added Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective Needs testing Requires functional testing labels Feb 12, 2025
@AkshayGadhaveRH AkshayGadhaveRH removed the Needs testing Requires functional testing label Feb 12, 2025
Copy link

Copy link
Contributor

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

style-wise LGTM. Kindly asking for tech ACK.

@maximiliankolb maximiliankolb added style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective and removed Needs style review Requires a review from docs style/grammar perspective labels Feb 12, 2025
@ehelms
Copy link
Member

ehelms commented Feb 13, 2025

@ShimShtein Can you review?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Needs tech review Requires a review from the technical perspective style review done No issues from docs style/grammar perspective
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants