Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
I did but still negative. No sessions shown in relayctl so still
thinking it's an issue in pf.
On 2020-07-13 22:51, Brian Brombacher wrote:
On Jul 13, 2020, at 8:30 PM, Gabri Tofano wrote:
I have tried to implement the workaround as per man page
but it still doesn't work, here the pf.conf config:
eth0 = "xnf0"
web1 = "172.16.101.31"
anchor "relayd/*"
set skip on lo
block return log
pass log
pass out quick on $eth0 proto tcp to $web1 port 80 \
received-on $eth0 nat-to $eth0
Try putting this before the anchor. The quick entry in the anchor
that relayd creates takes precedence.
block return in on ! lo0 proto tcp to port 6000:6010
block return out log proto {tcp udp} user _pbuild
I'm trying to gather some useful log on relayd and see if
there's any error but even with "relayctl log verbose"
nothing is showing beside the startup entries
Thank you!
There's a "workaround" also mentioned in pf.conf(5) which also works
with relayd inserted rdr-rules, e.g.
pass out quick on vlan99 proto tcp to 192.168.89.13 received-on
vlan99
nat-to 192.168.89.1
vlan99 has 'inet 192.168.89.1/24' and 192.168.89.13 is the relayd rdr
"target".
HTH,
--
pb
On 2020-07-13 01:08, Gabri Tofano wrote:
After some further troubleshooting, tonight I took some time to sit
down and
read again the man pages as everything on my config files was looking
fine and
no errors were showing up in any log. With Brian's help we were
leading to the
direction that something was wrong with the pf translation itself and
so I
tested a static rdr-to configuration with pf only in the same
environment, and
neither this test worked as expected. So I went back to read the
pf.conf man
page and here comes the rdr-to relevant section:
"Redirections cannot reflect packets back through the interface they
arrive on, they can only be redirected to hosts connected to
different
interfaces or to the firewall itself."
Focusing on relayd, my oversight was to not going back and read again
the
pf.conf man page in order to make sure that my box's network
configuration was
ok, since apparently I got it to work with relays without problems.
The next challenge now is to find if there is another way to make
this setup
working with just 1 network interface and implement relayd redirects
for SSL
passthrough, or give up. There seems to be few options here that I
can think of:
- Keep my current configuration with HAproxy
- Add another network interface to the box and configure an
additional
network to
it (it might be tricky when deploying a droplet with a direct public
IP address)
- Migrate to relayd relays and give up with SSL passthrough (with the
benefit of
SSL offloading if want to implement it)
Thank you to the community and the devs for the great work on this
OS!
Especially
on the man pages :)
On 2020-07-11 12:58, Gabri Tofano wrote:
It isn’t. rdr-to, and by extension redirects, are not natting the
source address.
Clients connecting through relayd and to the backend will have
source addresses
not that of the relayd machine but of the original client.
Thank you for correcting me on this as it was a bad statement told
before
getting coffee in the morning :)
I’m going to play around on my boxes and try and come up with some
options for you.
I’ll get back to you later.
Thank you for dedicating time in looking to this issue!
On 2020-07-11 12:08, Brian Brombacher wrote:
On Jul 11, 2020, at 11:20 AM, Gabri Tofano
wrote:
On 2020-07-11 06:33, Brian Brombacher wrote:
On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:42 PM, Gabri Tofano
wrote:
Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or
not in
your first post.
It doesn't work with http and that is the redirect that I was
testing.
Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down
status above, and the check http attribute on the https
forward to
directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http
configuration
for port 443.
Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something
else, see
if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs
or
otherwise.
I changed it to tcp and now the servers are showing as "up":
LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh sum
Id TypeName
Avlblty Status
1 redirecthttp
active
1 table web_servers:80
active (1 hosts)
1 host172.16.101.31
100.00% up
2 table nc_servers:80
active (1 hosts)
2 host172.16.101.32
100.00% up
2 redirecthttps
active
3 table web_servers:443
active (1 hosts)
3 host172.16.101.31
100.00% up
4 table nc_servers:443
active (1 hosts)
4 host172.16.101.32
100.00% up
However I was
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
I have tried to implement the workaround as per man page
but it still doesn't work, here the pf.conf config:
eth0 = "xnf0"
web1 = "172.16.101.31"
anchor "relayd/*"
set skip on lo
block return log
pass log
pass out quick on $eth0 proto tcp to $web1 port 80 \
received-on $eth0 nat-to $eth0
block return in on ! lo0 proto tcp to port 6000:6010
block return out log proto {tcp udp} user _pbuild
I'm trying to gather some useful log on relayd and see if
there's any error but even with "relayctl log verbose"
nothing is showing beside the startup entries
Thank you!
There's a "workaround" also mentioned in pf.conf(5) which also works
with relayd inserted rdr-rules, e.g.
pass out quick on vlan99 proto tcp to 192.168.89.13 received-on vlan99
nat-to 192.168.89.1
vlan99 has 'inet 192.168.89.1/24' and 192.168.89.13 is the relayd rdr
"target".
HTH,
--
pb
On 2020-07-13 01:08, Gabri Tofano wrote:
After some further troubleshooting, tonight I took some time to sit
down and
read again the man pages as everything on my config files was looking
fine and
no errors were showing up in any log. With Brian's help we were leading
to the
direction that something was wrong with the pf translation itself and
so I
tested a static rdr-to configuration with pf only in the same
environment, and
neither this test worked as expected. So I went back to read the
pf.conf man
page and here comes the rdr-to relevant section:
"Redirections cannot reflect packets back through the interface they
arrive on, they can only be redirected to hosts connected to different
interfaces or to the firewall itself."
Focusing on relayd, my oversight was to not going back and read again
the
pf.conf man page in order to make sure that my box's network
configuration was
ok, since apparently I got it to work with relays without problems.
The next challenge now is to find if there is another way to make this
setup
working with just 1 network interface and implement relayd redirects
for SSL
passthrough, or give up. There seems to be few options here that I can
think of:
- Keep my current configuration with HAproxy
- Add another network interface to the box and configure an additional
network to
it (it might be tricky when deploying a droplet with a direct public IP
address)
- Migrate to relayd relays and give up with SSL passthrough (with the
benefit of
SSL offloading if want to implement it)
Thank you to the community and the devs for the great work on this OS!
Especially
on the man pages :)
On 2020-07-11 12:58, Gabri Tofano wrote:
It isn’t. rdr-to, and by extension redirects, are not natting the
source address.
Clients connecting through relayd and to the backend will have source
addresses
not that of the relayd machine but of the original client.
Thank you for correcting me on this as it was a bad statement told
before
getting coffee in the morning :)
I’m going to play around on my boxes and try and come up with some
options for you.
I’ll get back to you later.
Thank you for dedicating time in looking to this issue!
On 2020-07-11 12:08, Brian Brombacher wrote:
On Jul 11, 2020, at 11:20 AM, Gabri Tofano
wrote:
On 2020-07-11 06:33, Brian Brombacher wrote:
On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:42 PM, Gabri Tofano
wrote:
Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or
not in
your first post.
It doesn't work with http and that is the redirect that I was
testing.
Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down
status above, and the check http attribute on the https forward
to
directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http
configuration
for port 443.
Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something
else, see
if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs or
otherwise.
I changed it to tcp and now the servers are showing as "up":
LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh sum
Id TypeNameAvlblty
Status
1 redirecthttp
active
1 table web_servers:80
active (1 hosts)
1 host172.16.101.31 100.00%
up
2 table nc_servers:80
active (1 hosts)
2 host172.16.101.32 100.00%
up
2 redirecthttps
active
3 table web_servers:443
active (1 hosts)
3 host172.16.101.31 100.00%
up
4 table nc_servers:443
active (1 hosts)
4 host172.16.101.32 100.00%
up
However I was hoping to fix the http redirect first and then
move to https, but it
looks like more of a "general issue" with redirects in my
current configuration.
Thanks
If http redirection isn’t working, I’d be curious from where you’re
trying to connect or what router you have configured on the backend
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
> On Jul 13, 2020, at 8:30 PM, Gabri Tofano wrote:
>
> I have tried to implement the workaround as per man page
> but it still doesn't work, here the pf.conf config:
>
> eth0 = "xnf0"
> web1 = "172.16.101.31"
>
> anchor "relayd/*"
>
> set skip on lo
>
> block return log
> pass log
>
> pass out quick on $eth0 proto tcp to $web1 port 80 \
> received-on $eth0 nat-to $eth0
Try putting this before the anchor. The quick entry in the anchor that relayd
creates takes precedence.
>
> block return in on ! lo0 proto tcp to port 6000:6010
> block return out log proto {tcp udp} user _pbuild
>
>
> I'm trying to gather some useful log on relayd and see if
> there's any error but even with "relayctl log verbose"
> nothing is showing beside the startup entries
>
> Thank you!
>
>> There's a "workaround" also mentioned in pf.conf(5) which also works
>> with relayd inserted rdr-rules, e.g.
>> pass out quick on vlan99 proto tcp to 192.168.89.13 received-on vlan99
>> nat-to 192.168.89.1
>> vlan99 has 'inet 192.168.89.1/24' and 192.168.89.13 is the relayd rdr
>> "target".
>> HTH,
>> --
>> pb
>>> On 2020-07-13 01:08, Gabri Tofano wrote:
>> After some further troubleshooting, tonight I took some time to sit down and
>> read again the man pages as everything on my config files was looking fine
>> and
>> no errors were showing up in any log. With Brian's help we were leading to
>> the
>> direction that something was wrong with the pf translation itself and so I
>> tested a static rdr-to configuration with pf only in the same environment,
>> and
>> neither this test worked as expected. So I went back to read the pf.conf man
>> page and here comes the rdr-to relevant section:
>> "Redirections cannot reflect packets back through the interface they
>> arrive on, they can only be redirected to hosts connected to different
>> interfaces or to the firewall itself."
>> Focusing on relayd, my oversight was to not going back and read again the
>> pf.conf man page in order to make sure that my box's network configuration
>> was
>> ok, since apparently I got it to work with relays without problems.
>> The next challenge now is to find if there is another way to make this setup
>> working with just 1 network interface and implement relayd redirects for SSL
>> passthrough, or give up. There seems to be few options here that I can think
>> of:
>> - Keep my current configuration with HAproxy
>> - Add another network interface to the box and configure an additional
>> network to
>> it (it might be tricky when deploying a droplet with a direct public IP
>> address)
>> - Migrate to relayd relays and give up with SSL passthrough (with the
>> benefit of
>> SSL offloading if want to implement it)
>> Thank you to the community and the devs for the great work on this OS!
>> Especially
>> on the man pages :)
>> On 2020-07-11 12:58, Gabri Tofano wrote:
It isn’t. rdr-to, and by extension redirects, are not natting the source
address.
Clients connecting through relayd and to the backend will have source
addresses
not that of the relayd machine but of the original client.
>>> Thank you for correcting me on this as it was a bad statement told before
>>> getting coffee in the morning :)
I’m going to play around on my boxes and try and come up with some options
for you.
I’ll get back to you later.
>>> Thank you for dedicating time in looking to this issue!
>>> On 2020-07-11 12:08, Brian Brombacher wrote:
>> On Jul 11, 2020, at 11:20 AM, Gabri Tofano wrote:
> On 2020-07-11 06:33, Brian Brombacher wrote:
>>> On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:42 PM, Gabri Tofano
>>> wrote:
>
>> Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or not in
>> your first post.
> It doesn't work with http and that is the redirect that I was testing.
>> Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down
>> status above, and the check http attribute on the https forward to
>> directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http configuration
>> for port 443.
>> Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something else, see
>> if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs or
>> otherwise.
> I changed it to tcp and now the servers are showing as "up":
> LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh sum
> Id TypeNameAvlblty Status
> 1 redirecthttpactive
> 1 table web_servers:80
> active (1 hosts)
> 1 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up
> 2 table nc_servers:80
> active (1 hosts)
> 2 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up
> 2 redirecthttps
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
After some further troubleshooting, tonight I took some time to sit down and read again the man pages as everything on my config files was looking fine and no errors were showing up in any log. With Brian's help we were leading to the direction that something was wrong with the pf translation itself and so I tested a static rdr-to configuration with pf only in the same environment, and neither this test worked as expected. So I went back to read the pf.conf man page and here comes the rdr-to relevant section: "Redirections cannot reflect packets back through the interface they arrive on, they can only be redirected to hosts connected to different interfaces or to the firewall itself." Focusing on relayd, my oversight was to not going back and read again the pf.conf man page in order to make sure that my box's network configuration was ok, since apparently I got it to work with relays without problems. The next challenge now is to find if there is another way to make this setup working with just 1 network interface and implement relayd redirects for SSL passthrough, or give up. There seems to be few options here that I can think of: - Keep my current configuration with HAproxy - Add another network interface to the box and configure an additional network to it (it might be tricky when deploying a droplet with a direct public IP address) - Migrate to relayd relays and give up with SSL passthrough (with the benefit of SSL offloading if want to implement it) Thank you to the community and the devs for the great work on this OS! Especially on the man pages :) On 2020-07-11 12:58, Gabri Tofano wrote: It isn’t. rdr-to, and by extension redirects, are not natting the source address. Clients connecting through relayd and to the backend will have source addresses not that of the relayd machine but of the original client. Thank you for correcting me on this as it was a bad statement told before getting coffee in the morning :) I’m going to play around on my boxes and try and come up with some options for you. I’ll get back to you later. Thank you for dedicating time in looking to this issue! On 2020-07-11 12:08, Brian Brombacher wrote: On Jul 11, 2020, at 11:20 AM, Gabri Tofano wrote: On 2020-07-11 06:33, Brian Brombacher wrote: On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:42 PM, Gabri Tofano wrote: Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or not in your first post. It doesn't work with http and that is the redirect that I was testing. Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down status above, and the check http attribute on the https forward to directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http configuration for port 443. Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something else, see if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs or otherwise. I changed it to tcp and now the servers are showing as "up": LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh sum Id TypeNameAvlblty Status 1 redirecthttp active 1 table web_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 1 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up 2 table nc_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 2 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up 2 redirecthttps active 3 table web_servers:443 active (1 hosts) 3 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up 4 table nc_servers:443 active (1 hosts) 4 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up However I was hoping to fix the http redirect first and then move to https, but it looks like more of a "general issue" with redirects in my current configuration. Thanks If http redirection isn’t working, I’d be curious from where you’re trying to connect or what router you have configured on the backend hosts. I see you’re relayd box and back ends are on the same network. If you’re trying to connect from another address in 172.16.101.x to your relayd setup, it won’t work reliably. It might also not work reliably or at all, if you are not routing responses through the relayd host. If they are replying direct, any PF scrub normalization, tcp sequence handling, etc., all get lost, among other issues. I hope this is the cause of your issues, otherwise you’re going to need to include more information for your setup, or at a minimum some relayd logs. -Brian I have a layer3 switch doing routing between 2 vlans, relayd and the 2 backend web servers are on the same vlan and the client is on another vlan 172.16.100.x. The relayd VM is configured with only 1 network interface. When the client try to reach the web servers directly everything work fine. When the client is passing through relayd I see
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
Am 13.07.2020 07:08 schrieb Gabri Tofano: "Redirections cannot reflect packets back through the interface they arrive on, they can only be redirected to hosts connected to different interfaces or to the firewall itself." - Keep my current configuration with HAproxy - Add another network interface to the box and configure an additional network to it (it might be tricky when deploying a droplet with a direct public IP address) - Migrate to relayd relays and give up with SSL passthrough (with the benefit of SSL offloading if want to implement it) There's a "workaround" also mentioned in pf.conf(5) which also works with relayd inserted rdr-rules, e.g. pass out quick on vlan99 proto tcp to 192.168.89.13 received-on vlan99 nat-to 192.168.89.1 vlan99 has 'inet 192.168.89.1/24' and 192.168.89.13 is the relayd rdr "target". HTH, -- pb
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
It isn’t. rdr-to, and by extension redirects, are not natting the source address. Clients connecting through relayd and to the backend will have source addresses not that of the relayd machine but of the original client. Thank you for correcting me on this as it was a bad statement told before getting coffee in the morning :) I’m going to play around on my boxes and try and come up with some options for you. I’ll get back to you later. Thank you for dedicating time in looking to this issue! On 2020-07-11 12:08, Brian Brombacher wrote: On Jul 11, 2020, at 11:20 AM, Gabri Tofano wrote: On 2020-07-11 06:33, Brian Brombacher wrote: On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:42 PM, Gabri Tofano wrote: Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or not in your first post. It doesn't work with http and that is the redirect that I was testing. Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down status above, and the check http attribute on the https forward to directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http configuration for port 443. Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something else, see if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs or otherwise. I changed it to tcp and now the servers are showing as "up": LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh sum Id TypeNameAvlblty Status 1 redirecthttp active 1 table web_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 1 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up 2 table nc_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 2 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up 2 redirecthttps active 3 table web_servers:443 active (1 hosts) 3 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up 4 table nc_servers:443 active (1 hosts) 4 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up However I was hoping to fix the http redirect first and then move to https, but it looks like more of a "general issue" with redirects in my current configuration. Thanks If http redirection isn’t working, I’d be curious from where you’re trying to connect or what router you have configured on the backend hosts. I see you’re relayd box and back ends are on the same network. If you’re trying to connect from another address in 172.16.101.x to your relayd setup, it won’t work reliably. It might also not work reliably or at all, if you are not routing responses through the relayd host. If they are replying direct, any PF scrub normalization, tcp sequence handling, etc., all get lost, among other issues. I hope this is the cause of your issues, otherwise you’re going to need to include more information for your setup, or at a minimum some relayd logs. -Brian I have a layer3 switch doing routing between 2 vlans, relayd and the 2 backend web servers are on the same vlan and the client is on another vlan 172.16.100.x. The relayd VM is configured with only 1 network interface. When the client try to reach the web servers directly everything work fine. When the client is passing through relayd I see the following: - Only SYN packets coming into relayd box which they become retransmissions - The relayd anchor rules do not have the log parameter set so I cannot see passing traffic from the client to the backend servers, but at least no traffic is being blocked. I haven't found a way to manipulate an anchor via pfctl in order to add the log parameter - The web server does not see any traffic reaching out on port 80 beside the http checks from relayd IP address - I have set "log connection" in relayd.conf and then relayctl log verbose but /var/log/daemon unfortunately is not showing much: relayd[84883]: startup relayd[84883]: unused protocol: http relayd[84883]: unused protocol: https relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.32, check tcp (1ms,tcp connect ok), state unknown -> up, availability 100.00% relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.31, check tcp (2ms,tcp connect ok), state unknown -> up, availability 100.00% relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.31, check http code (3ms,http code ok), state unknown -> up, availability 100.00% relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.32, check http code (3ms,http code ok), state unknown -> up, availability 100.00% relayd[17311]: table http: 1 added, 0 deleted, 0 changed, 0 killed relayd[17311]: table https: 1 added, 0 deleted, 0 changed, 0 killed Since with relayd redirects traffic is being natted, It isn’t. rdr-to, and by extension redirects, are not natting the source address. Clients connecting through relayd and to the backend will have source addresses not that of the relayd machine but of the original client. I'm not sure if the issue could be with the fact that relayd is natting on the same
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
On 2020-07-11 06:33, Brian Brombacher wrote: On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:42 PM, Gabri Tofano wrote: Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or not in your first post. It doesn't work with http and that is the redirect that I was testing. Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down status above, and the check http attribute on the https forward to directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http configuration for port 443. Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something else, see if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs or otherwise. I changed it to tcp and now the servers are showing as "up": LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh sum Id TypeNameAvlblty Status 1 redirecthttpactive 1 table web_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 1 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up 2 table nc_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 2 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up 2 redirecthttps active 3 table web_servers:443 active (1 hosts) 3 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up 4 table nc_servers:443 active (1 hosts) 4 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up However I was hoping to fix the http redirect first and then move to https, but it looks like more of a "general issue" with redirects in my current configuration. Thanks If http redirection isn’t working, I’d be curious from where you’re trying to connect or what router you have configured on the backend hosts. I see you’re relayd box and back ends are on the same network. If you’re trying to connect from another address in 172.16.101.x to your relayd setup, it won’t work reliably. It might also not work reliably or at all, if you are not routing responses through the relayd host. If they are replying direct, any PF scrub normalization, tcp sequence handling, etc., all get lost, among other issues. I hope this is the cause of your issues, otherwise you’re going to need to include more information for your setup, or at a minimum some relayd logs. -Brian I have a layer3 switch doing routing between 2 vlans, relayd and the 2 backend web servers are on the same vlan and the client is on another vlan 172.16.100.x. The relayd VM is configured with only 1 network interface. When the client try to reach the web servers directly everything work fine. When the client is passing through relayd I see the following: - Only SYN packets coming into relayd box which they become retransmissions - The relayd anchor rules do not have the log parameter set so I cannot see passing traffic from the client to the backend servers, but at least no traffic is being blocked. I haven't found a way to manipulate an anchor via pfctl in order to add the log parameter - The web server does not see any traffic reaching out on port 80 beside the http checks from relayd IP address - I have set "log connection" in relayd.conf and then relayctl log verbose but /var/log/daemon unfortunately is not showing much: relayd[84883]: startup relayd[84883]: unused protocol: http relayd[84883]: unused protocol: https relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.32, check tcp (1ms,tcp connect ok), state unknown -> up, availability 100.00% relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.31, check tcp (2ms,tcp connect ok), state unknown -> up, availability 100.00% relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.31, check http code (3ms,http code ok), state unknown -> up, availability 100.00% relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.32, check http code (3ms,http code ok), state unknown -> up, availability 100.00% relayd[17311]: table http: 1 added, 0 deleted, 0 changed, 0 killed relayd[17311]: table https: 1 added, 0 deleted, 0 changed, 0 killed Since with relayd redirects traffic is being natted, I'm not sure if the issue could be with the fact that relayd is natting on the same interface for the same network subnet, as with relayd relays everything works fine. I'm currently stuck in trying to find a way to log verbose what is happening on relayd as at least the client sessions are seen on relayd itself: LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh redirects Id TypeNameAvlblty Status 1 redirecthttpactive total: 18 sessions last: 0/60s 2/h 18/d sessions average: 0/60s 0/h 0/d sessions 2 redirecthttps active Thank you,
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
>> On Jul 11, 2020, at 11:20 AM, Gabri Tofano wrote: > On 2020-07-11 06:33, Brian Brombacher wrote: >>> On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:42 PM, Gabri Tofano wrote: > >> Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or not in >> your first post. > It doesn't work with http and that is the redirect that I was testing. >> Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down >> status above, and the check http attribute on the https forward to >> directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http configuration >> for port 443. >> Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something else, see >> if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs or >> otherwise. > I changed it to tcp and now the servers are showing as "up": > LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh sum > Id TypeNameAvlblty Status > 1 redirecthttpactive > 1 table web_servers:80 active (1 > hosts) > 1 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up > 2 table nc_servers:80 active (1 > hosts) > 2 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up > 2 redirecthttps active > 3 table web_servers:443 active (1 > hosts) > 3 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up > 4 table nc_servers:443 active (1 > hosts) > 4 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up > However I was hoping to fix the http redirect first and then move to > https, but it > looks like more of a "general issue" with redirects in my current > configuration. > Thanks >> If http redirection isn’t working, I’d be curious from where you’re >> trying to connect or what router you have configured on the backend >> hosts. I see you’re relayd box and back ends are on the same network. >> If you’re trying to connect from another address in 172.16.101.x to >> your relayd setup, it won’t work reliably. It might also not work >> reliably or at all, if you are not routing responses through the >> relayd host. >> If they are replying direct, any PF scrub normalization, tcp sequence >> handling, etc., all get lost, among other issues. >> I hope this is the cause of your issues, otherwise you’re going to >> need to include more information for your setup, or at a minimum some >> relayd logs. >> -Brian > > I have a layer3 switch doing routing between 2 vlans, relayd and the 2 > backend web servers are on the same vlan and the client is on another > vlan 172.16.100.x. The relayd VM is configured with only 1 network > interface. When the client try to reach the web servers directly > everything work fine. When the client is passing through relayd I see > the following: > > - Only SYN packets coming into relayd box which they become retransmissions > - The relayd anchor rules do not have the log parameter set so I cannot > see passing traffic from the client to the backend servers, but at least > no traffic is being blocked. I haven't found a way to manipulate an anchor > via pfctl in order to add the log parameter > - The web server does not see any traffic reaching out on port 80 beside > the http checks from relayd IP address > - I have set "log connection" in relayd.conf and then relayctl log verbose > but /var/log/daemon unfortunately is not showing much: > > relayd[84883]: startup > relayd[84883]: unused protocol: http > relayd[84883]: unused protocol: https > relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.32, check tcp (1ms,tcp connect ok), state > unknown -> up, availability 100.00% > relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.31, check tcp (2ms,tcp connect ok), state > unknown -> up, availability 100.00% > relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.31, check http code (3ms,http code ok), state > unknown -> up, availability 100.00% > relayd[33541]: host 172.16.101.32, check http code (3ms,http code ok), state > unknown -> up, availability 100.00% > relayd[17311]: table http: 1 added, 0 deleted, 0 changed, 0 killed > relayd[17311]: table https: 1 added, 0 deleted, 0 changed, 0 killed > > Since with relayd redirects traffic is being natted, It isn’t. rdr-to, and by extension redirects, are not natting the source address. Clients connecting through relayd and to the backend will have source addresses not that of the relayd machine but of the original client. > I'm not sure if the > issue could be with the fact that relayd is natting on the same interface > for the same network subnet, as with relayd relays everything works fine. Correct, my assumption is this is your problem as well. Relays work like a tcp proxy, so the source address changes and your backends happily respond direct to the relayd
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
> On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:42 PM, Gabri Tofano wrote: > > >> Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or not in >> your first post. > > It doesn't work with http and that is the redirect that I was testing. > >> Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down >> status above, and the check http attribute on the https forward to >> directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http configuration >> for port 443. >> Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something else, see >> if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs or >> otherwise. > > I changed it to tcp and now the servers are showing as "up": > > LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh sum > Id TypeNameAvlblty Status > 1 redirecthttpactive > 1 table web_servers:80 active (1 > hosts) > 1 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up > 2 table nc_servers:80 active (1 > hosts) > 2 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up > 2 redirecthttps active > 3 table web_servers:443 active (1 > hosts) > 3 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up > 4 table nc_servers:443 active (1 > hosts) > 4 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up > > However I was hoping to fix the http redirect first and then move to https, > but it > looks like more of a "general issue" with redirects in my current > configuration. > > Thanks If http redirection isn’t working, I’d be curious from where you’re trying to connect or what router you have configured on the backend hosts. I see you’re relayd box and back ends are on the same network. If you’re trying to connect from another address in 172.16.101.x to your relayd setup, it won’t work reliably. It might also not work reliably or at all, if you are not routing responses through the relayd host. If they are replying direct, any PF scrub normalization, tcp sequence handling, etc., all get lost, among other issues. I hope this is the cause of your issues, otherwise you’re going to need to include more information for your setup, or at a minimum some relayd logs. -Brian
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or not in your first post. It doesn't work with http and that is the redirect that I was testing. Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down status above, and the check http attribute on the https forward to directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http configuration for port 443. Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something else, see if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs or otherwise. I changed it to tcp and now the servers are showing as "up": LAB1-LB1# relayctl sh sum Id TypeNameAvlblty Status 1 redirecthttpactive 1 table web_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 1 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up 2 table nc_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 2 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up 2 redirecthttps active 3 table web_servers:443 active (1 hosts) 3 host172.16.101.31 100.00% up 4 table nc_servers:443 active (1 hosts) 4 host172.16.101.32 100.00% up However I was hoping to fix the http redirect first and then move to https, but it looks like more of a "general issue" with redirects in my current configuration. Thanks
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
Here: LAB1-LB1$ relayctl sh sum Id TypeName Avlblty Status 1 redirecthttp active 1 table web_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 1 host172.16.101.31 4.87% up 2 table nc_servers:80 active (1 hosts) 2 host172.16.101.32 4.86% up 2 redirecthttps down 3 table web_servers:443empty 3 host172.16.101.31 0.00% down 4 table nc_servers:443 empty 4 host172.16.101.32 0.00% down The low availability is due too the web servers were turned off. Thanks! On 2020-07-10 17:41, Sebastian Benoit wrote: Gabri Tofano(ga...@tofanos.com) on 2020.07.07 15:38:17 -0400: When using redirections, no listening ports are open (I guess due to relayd using pf nat rules) correct and I'm unable to reach both backend servers. show the output of "relayctl sh sum".
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
> On Jul 10, 2020, at 9:15 PM, Gabri Tofano wrote: > > Here: > > LAB1-LB1$ relayctl sh sum > Id TypeName Avlblty Status > 1 redirecthttp active > 1 table web_servers:80 active (1 hosts) > 1 host172.16.101.31 4.87% up > 2 table nc_servers:80 active (1 hosts) > 2 host172.16.101.32 4.86% up > 2 redirecthttps down > 3 table web_servers:443empty > 3 host172.16.101.31 0.00% down > 4 table nc_servers:443 empty > 4 host172.16.101.32 0.00% down > Does http work with redirects? It wasn’t clear if it did or not in your first post. Indications from your pf anchor rules and the down status above, and the check http attribute on the https forward to directives tell me relayd isn’t liking your check http configuration for port 443. Start by switching to check icmp or check tcp or something else, see if it works, unless you can fix the check http based on logs or otherwise. > The low availability is due too the web servers were turned off. > > Thanks! > >> On 2020-07-10 17:41, Sebastian Benoit wrote: >> Gabri Tofano(ga...@tofanos.com) on 2020.07.07 15:38:17 -0400: >>> When using redirections, no listening ports are open (I guess due to >>> relayd using pf nat rules) >> correct >>> and I'm unable to reach both backend servers. >> show the output of "relayctl sh sum". >
Re: Issue with relayd and redirections
Gabri Tofano(ga...@tofanos.com) on 2020.07.07 15:38:17 -0400: > When using redirections, no listening ports are open (I guess due to > relayd using pf nat rules) correct > and I'm unable to reach both backend servers. show the output of "relayctl sh sum".
