I am sorry, I mis posted this. Sorry for the noise

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 8:52 AM, John Omernik <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have been playing with an application that is a very simple app: A
> webservice running in Python. I've created a docker container, it runs in
> the container, I setup marathon to run it, I use mesos-dns and ha proxy and
> I can access the service just fine anywhere in the cluster.
>
> First let me say this is VERY cool. The capabilities here awesome.
>
> Now the challenge: the security guy in me wants to take good logs from my
> app.  It was setup to do it's own logging through a custom module. I am
> very happy with it.  I setup the app in the container to mount a volume
> that's in my MapRFS via NFS so I can log directly to a clustered
> filesystem. THis is awesome, I can read my logs in Apache Drill as they are
> written!!!
>
> However, the haproxy through me for a loop. Once I started running the app
> in Marathon with a service port and routed around via haproxy, I realized
> something:  I lost my source IPs in my logs?
>
> Why?
>
> Because once HAProxy takes over, it no longer needs to keep the source IP,
> and instead the next hop only sees the previous connection IP.  From a
> service discovery perspective it works great, but with this setup, I'd lose
> the previous hop. Perhaps I manually add something in haproxy to add an
> X-forwarded-for header, that would be nice, however, that only works for
> http apps, what about other TCP apps that are not HTTP?
>
> This is an interesting problem, because apps should have good logging,
> security, performance, troubleshooting, and if I can't get the source IP it
> could be a problem.
>
> So, my question is this, anyone ran into this? How are you handling it?
> Any brainstorms here we may be able to work off of?
>
> One thing I thought was why are we using HAproxy? Couldn't the same
> HAProxy script, actually put in forwarding rules in IPtables?  This sounds
> messy, but could it work? Has anyone explored that? If the data was
> forwarded, than it wouldn't lose the IP information (and timeouts wouldn't
> be a concern either (I think I posted before on how long running TCP
> connections can be closed down by HAProxy if they don't implement TCP Keep
> alives).
>
> Other ideas?  This is interesting to me, and likely others.
>
>
> John
>

Reply via email to