[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9339?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15729511#comment-15729511
 ] 

ASF subversion and git services commented on CLOUDSTACK-9339:
-------------------------------------------------------------

Commit 2e5373b7f8903494ab91308771dc89e463a5a6d4 in cloudstack's branch 
refs/heads/master from [~rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com]
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=2e5373b ]

Merge pull request #1659 from murali-reddy/multiple_public_ip_ranges_non_vpc

CLOUDSTACK-9339 Virtual Routers don't handle Multiple Public Interfaces 
correctlyAs pointed out in CLOUDSTACK-9339, in case of multiple public IP's 
from different public IP ranges are associated with VR, VR functionality is 
broken from 4.6. Below are the brief list of problems specific to non-VPC 
networks addressed in the PR. This PR handles both VPC and non-VPC scenarios.
- reverse traffic for the connections accepted on the eth3 and above public 
interfaces are getting blocked. Need a rule for e.g "-A FORWARD -i  eth3 -o 
eth0 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT" in the FORWARD chain of 
filter table to permit reverse path traffic for established connections.
- outbound public traffic from eth0 to eth3 (or for interfaces above like eth4 
eth5 etc) needs rule to run through FW_OUTBOUND chain in the filter table
- network stats on public interfaces eth3 are getting gathered
- default gateway is missing in the device specific routing table, resulting in 
traffic to be looked up in main routing table
- creating a device specific route table is generating "from all lookup 
Table_eth3" in the
  ip rules, resulting in rest of the traffic getting blocked.

Picked few commits from #1519 from dsclose 
(https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1519) submitted for 4.7

Marvin tests are added to test below
- Static NAT works on the public interfaces above eth2, in case non-vpc networks
- Portforwarding works on the public interfaces above eth2, in case non-vpc 
networks
- Route tables are configured as expected for the device specific table for the 
public interfaces above eth2, in case non-vpc networks
- IP tables rules are as expected for the traffic from and to the public 
interfaces above eth2, in case non-vpc networks

* pr/1659:
  CLOUDSTACK-9339 Virtual Routers don't handle Multiple Public Interfaces 
correctly

Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>


> Virtual Routers don't handle Multiple Public Interfaces
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CLOUDSTACK-9339
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9339
>             Project: CloudStack
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the 
> default.) 
>          Components: Virtual Router
>    Affects Versions: 4.8.0
>            Reporter: dsclose
>            Assignee: Murali Reddy
>              Labels: firewall, nat, router
>             Fix For: 4.10.0.0, 4.9.1.0
>
>
> There are a series of issues with the way Virtual Routers manage multiple 
> public interfaces. These are more pronounced on redundant virtual router 
> setups. I have not attempted to examine these issues in a VPC context. 
> Outside of a VPC context, however, the following is expected behaviour:
> * eth0 connects the router to the guest network.
> * In RvR setups, keepalived manages the guests' gateway IP as a virtual IP on 
> eth0.
> * eth1 provides a local link to the hypervisor, allowing Cloudstack to issue 
> commands to the router.
> * eth2 is the routers public interface. By default, a single public IP will 
> be setup on eth2 along with the necessary iptables and ip rules to source-NAT 
> guest traffic to that public IP.
> * When a public IP address is assigned to the router that is on a separate 
> subnet to the source-NAT IP, a new interface is configured, such as eth3, and 
> the IP is assigned to that interface.
> * This can result in eth3, eth4, eth5, etc. being created depending upon how 
> many public subnets the router has to work with.
> The above all works. The following, however, is currently not working:
> * Public interfaces should be set to DOWN on backup redundant routers. The 
> master.py script is responsible for setting public interfaces to UP during a 
> keepalived transition. Currently the check_is_up method of the CsIP class 
> brings all interfaces UP on both RvR. A proposed fix for this has been 
> discussed on the mailing list. That fix will leave public interfaces DOWN on 
> RvR allowing the keepalived transition to control the state of public 
> interfaces. Issue #1413 includes a commit that contradicts the proposed fix 
> so it is unclear what the current state of the code should be.
> * Newly created interfaces should be set to UP on master redundant routers. 
> Assuming public interfaces should be default be DOWN on an RvR we need to 
> accommodate the fact that, as interfaces are created, no keepalived 
> transition occurs. This means that assigning an IP from a new public subnet 
> will have no effect (as the interface will be down) until the network is 
> restarted with a "clean up."
> * Public interfaces other than eth2 do not forward traffic. There are two 
> iptables rules in the FORWARD chain of the filter table created for eth2 that 
> allow forwarding between eth2 and eth0. Equivalent rules are not created for 
> other public interfaces so forwarded traffic is dropped.
> * Outbound traffic from guest VMs does not honour static-NAT rules. Instead, 
> outbound traffic is source-NAT'd to the networks default source-NAT IP. New 
> connections from guests that are destined for public networks are processed 
> like so:
> 1. Traffic is matched against the following rule in the mangle table that 
> marks the connection with a 0x0:
> *mangle
> -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -m state --state NEW -j CONNMARK --set-xmark 
> 0x0/0xffffffff
> 2. There are no "ip rule" statements that match a connection marked 0x0, so 
> the kernel routes the connection via the default gateway. That gateway is on 
> source-NAT subnet, so the connection is routed out of eth2.
> 3. The following iptables rules are then matched in the filter table:
> *filter
> -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -j FW_OUTBOUND
> -A FW_OUTBOUND -j FW_EGRESS_RULES
> -A FW_EGRESS_RULES -j ACCEPT
> 4. Finally, the following rule is matched from the nat table, where the IP 
> address is the source-NAT IP:
> *nat
> -A POSTROUTING -o eth2 -j SNAT --to-source 123.4.5.67
>  



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to