If I am understanding this correctly, I don't think this is a bug. If the member needs to accept traffic from a protocol on a specific port, then I don't think that should be Octavia's job. If a user wants that traffic on that port using that protocol accepted, then that user should add a security group rule to their member's neutron port (or server). We're not always guaranteed that the IP and subnet combination they provide is even associated to a nova server or even a neutron port (publicly accessible IPs).
If I am understanding this correctly, I don't think this is a bug. If the member needs to accept traffic from a protocol on a specific port, then I don't think that should be Octavia's job. If a user wants that traffic on that port using that protocol accepted, then that user should add a security group rule to their member's neutron port (or server). We're not always guaranteed that the IP and subnet combination they provide is even associated to a nova server or even a neutron port (publicly accessible IPs).
Let me know if I'm misunderstanding the bug.