cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
Subject Re: Upgrade from ACS 4.9.X to 4.11.0 broke VPC source NAT
Date Fri, 20 Apr 2018 09:35:55 GMT
Hi Andrei,

I've fixed this recently, please see
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2579

As a workaround you can add routing rules manually. On the PR, there is a link to a comment
that explains the issue and suggests manual workaround. Let me know if that works for you.

Regards.


From: Andrei Mikhailovsky
Sent: Friday, 20 April, 2:21 PM
Subject: Upgrade from ACS 4.9.X to 4.11.0 broke VPC source NAT
To: dev


Hello, I have been posting to the users thread about this issue. here is a quick summary in
case if people contributing to the source nat code on the VPC side would like to fix this
issue. Problem summary: no connectivity between virtual machines behind two Static NAT networks.
Problem case: When one virtual machine sends a packet to the external address of the another
virtual machine that are handled by the same router and both are behind the Static NAT the
traffic does not work. 10.1.10.100 10.1.10.1:eth2 eth3:10.1.20.1 10.1.20.100 virt1 router
virt2 178.248.108.77:eth1:178.248.108.113 a single packet is send from virt1 to virt2. stage1:
it arrives to the router on eth2 and enters "nat_PREROUTING" IN=eth2 OUT= SRC=10.1.10.100
DST=178.248.108.113) goes through the "10 1K DNAT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 178.248.108.113 to:10.1.20.100
" rule and has the DST DNATED to the internal IP of the virt2 stage2: Enters the FORWARDING
chain and is being DROPPED by the default policy. DROPPED:IN=eth2 OUT=eth1 SRC=10.1.10.100
DST=10.1.20.100 The reason being is that the OUT interface is not correctly changed from eth1
to eth3 during the nat_PREROUTING so the packet is not intercepted by the FORWARD rule and
thus not accepted. "24 14K ACL_INBOUND_eth3 all -- * eth3 0.0.0.0/0 10.1.20.0/24" stage3:
manually inserted rule to accept this packet for FORWARDING. the packet enters the "nat_POSTROUTING"
chain IN= OUT=eth1 SRC=10.1.10.100 DST=10.1.20.100 and has the SRC changed to the external
IP 16 1320 SNAT all -- * eth1 10.1.10.100 0.0.0.0/0 to:178.248.108.77 and is sent to the external
network on eth1. 13:37:44.834341 IP 178.248.108.77 > 10.1.20.100: ICMP echo request, id
2644, seq 2, length 64 For some reason, during the nat_PREROUTING stage the DST_IP is changed,
but the OUT interface still reflects the interface associated with the old DST_IP. Here is
the routing table # ip route list default via 178.248.108.1 dev eth1 10.1.10.0/24 dev eth2
proto kernel scope link src 10.1.10.1 10.1.20.0/24 dev eth3 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.20.1
169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 169.254.0.5 178.248.108.0/25 dev eth1
proto kernel scope link src 178.248.108.101 # ip rule list 0: from all lookup local 32761:
from all fwmark 0x3 lookup Table_eth3 32762: from all fwmark 0x2 lookup Table_eth2 32763:
from all fwmark 0x1 lookup Table_eth1 32764: from 10.1.0.0/16 lookup static_route_back 32765:
from 10.1.0.0/16 lookup static_route 32766: from all lookup main 32767: from all lookup default
Further into the investigation, the problem was pinned down to those rules. All the traffic
from internal IP on the static NATed connection were forced to go to the outside interface
(eth1), by setting the mark 0x1 and then using the matching # ip rule to direct it. #iptables
-t mangle -L PREROUTING -vn Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT 97 packets, 11395 bytes) pkts
bytes target prot opt in out source destination 49 3644 CONNMARK all -- * * 10.1.10.100 0.0.0.0/0
state NEW CONNMARK save 37 2720 MARK all -- * * 10.1.20.100 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW MARK set 0x1
37 2720 CONNMARK all -- * * 10.1.20.100 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW CONNMARK save 114 8472 MARK all
-- * * 10.1.10.100 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW MARK set 0x1 114 8472 CONNMARK all -- * * 10.1.10.100
0.0.0.0/0 state NEW CONNMARK save # ip rule 0: from all lookup local 32761: from all fwmark
0x3 lookup Table_eth3 32762: from all fwmark 0x2 lookup Table_eth2 32763: from all fwmark
0x1 lookup Table_eth1 32764: from 10.1.0.0/16 lookup static_route_back 32765: from 10.1.0.0/16
lookup static_route 32766: from all lookup main 32767: from all lookup default The acceptable
solution is to delete those rules all together.? The problem with such approach is that the
inter VPC traffic will use the internal IP addresses, so the packets going from 178.248.108.77
to 178.248.108.113 would be seen as communication between 10.1.10.100 and 10.1.20.100 thus
we need to apply further two rules # iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -o eth3 -s 10.1.10.0/24
-d 10.1.20.0/24 -j SNAT --to-source 178.248.108.77 # iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -o eth2
-s 10.1.20.0/24 -d 10.1.10.0/24 -j SNAT --to-source 178.248.108.113 in order to make sure
that the packets leaving the router would have correct source IP. This way it is possible
to have static NAT on all of the IPS within the VPC and ensure a successful communication
between them. So, for a quick and dirty fix, we ran this command on the VR: for i in iptables
-t mangle -L PREROUTING -vn | awk '/0x1/ && !/eth1/ {print $8}'; do iptables -t mangle
-D PREROUTING -s $i -m state —state NEW -j MARK —set-mark "0x1" ; done The issue has been
introduced around early 4.9.x releases I believe. Thanks Andrei 
rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
  
 

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrei Mikhailovsky" > To: "users" > Sent:
Monday, 16 April, 2018 22:32:25 > Subject: Re: Upgrade from ACS 4.9.3 to 4.11.0 > Hello,
> > I have done some more testing with the VPC network tiers and it seems that the >
Static NAT is indeed causing connectivity issues. Here is what I've done: > > > Setup
1. I have created two test network tiers with one guest vm in each tier. > Static NAT is
NOT enabled. Each VM has a port forwarding rule (port 22) from > its dedicated public IP
address. ACLs have been setup to allow traffic on port > 22 from the private ip addresses
on each network tier. > > 1. ACLs seems to work just fine. traffic between the networks
flows according to > the rules. both vms can see each other's private IPs and can ping/ssh/etc
> > 2. From the Internet hosts can access vms on port 22 > > 4. The vms can also
access each other and itself on their public IPs. I don't > think this worked before, but
could be wrong. > > > > Setup 2. Everything the same as Setup 1, but one public
IP address has been > setup as Static NAT to one guest vm. the second guest vm and second
public IP > remained unchanged. > > 1. ACLs stopped working correctly (see below)
> > 2. From the Internet hosts can access vms on port 22, including the Static NAT >
vm > > 3. Other guest vms can access the Static NAT vm using private & public IP
> addresses > > 4. Static NAT vm can NOT access other vms neither using public nor
private IPs > > 5. Static NAT vm can access the internet hosts (apart from the public
IP range > belonging to the cloudstack setup) > > > The above behaviour of Setup
2 scenarios is very strange, especially points 4 & > 5. > > Any thoughts anyone?
> > Cheers > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Rohit Yadav" >>
To: "users" >> Sent: Thursday, 12 April, 2018 12:06:54 >> Subject: Re: Upgrade
from ACS 4.9.3 to 4.11.0 > >> Hi Andrei, >> >> >> Thanks for sharing,
yes the egress thing is a known issue which is caused due to >> failure during VR setup
to create egress table. By performing a restart of the >> network (without cleanup option
selected), the egress table gets created and >> rules are successfully applied. >>
>> >> The issue has been fixed in the vr downtime pr: >> >> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2508
>> >> >> - Rohit >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________
>> From: Andrei Mikhailovsky >> Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 3:33:43 PM >>
To: users >> Subject: Re: Upgrade from ACS 4.9.3 to 4.11.0 >> >> Rohit,
>> >> Following the update from 4.9.3 to 4.11.0, I would like to comment on a
few >> things: >> >> 1. The upgrade went well, a part from the cloudstack-management
server startup >> issue that I've described in my previous email. >> 2. there
was an issue with the virtual router template upgrade. The issue is >> described below:
>> >> VR template upgrade issue: >> >> After updating the systemvm
template I went onto the Infrastructure > Virtual >> Routers and selected the Update
template option for each virtual router. The >> virtual routers were updated successfully
using the new templates. However, >> this has broken ALL Egress rules on all networks
and none of the guest vms. >> Port forwarding / incoming rules were working just fine.
Removal and addition >> of Egress rules did not fix the issue. To fix the issue I had
to restart each >> of the networks with the Clean up option ticked. >> >>
>> Cheers >> >> Andrei >> >> rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com >>
www.shapeblue.com >> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >> @shapeblue
>> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Andrei
Mikhailovsky" >>> To: "users" >>> Sent: Monday, 2 April, 2018 21:44:27 >>>
Subject: Re: Upgrade from ACS 4.9.3 to 4.11.0 >> >>> Hi Rohit, >>>
>>> Following some further investigation it seems that the installation packages
>>> replaced the following file: >>> >>> /etc/default/cloudstack-management
>>> >>> with >>> >>> /etc/default/cloudstack-management.dpkg-dist
>>> >>> >>> Thus, the management server couldn't load the env variables
and thus was unable >>> to start. >>> >>> I've put the file back
and the management server is able to start. >>> >>> I will let you know
if there are any other issues/problems. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>>
Andrei >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>
From: "Andrei Mikhailovsky" >>>> To: "users" >>>> Sent: Monday, 2
April, 2018 20:58:59 >>>> Subject: Re: Upgrade from ACS 4.9.3 to 4.11.0 >>>
>>>> Hi Rohit, >>>> >>>> I have just upgraded and having
issues starting the service with the following >>>> error: >>>> >>>>
>>>> Apr 02 20:56:37 ais-cloudhost13 systemd[1]: cloudstack-management.service:
>>>> Failed to load environment files: No such file or directory >>>>
Apr 02 20:56:37 ais-cloudhost13 systemd[1]: cloudstack-management.service: >>>>
Failed to run 'start-pre' task: No such file or directory >>>> Apr 02 20:56:37
ais-cloudhost13 systemd[1]: Failed to start CloudStack >>>> Management Server.
>>>> -- Subject: Unit cloudstack-management.service has failed >>>>
-- Defined-By: systemd >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>>
Andrei >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>
From: "Rohit Yadav" >>>>> To: "users" >>>>> Sent: Friday, 30
March, 2018 19:17:48 >>>>> Subject: Re: Upgrade from ACS 4.9.3 to 4.11.0 >>>>
>>>>> Some of the upgrade and minor issues have been fixed and will make their
way >>>>> into 4.11.1.0. You're welcome to upgrade and share your feedback,
but bear in >>>>> mind due to some changes a new/updated systemvmtemplate need
to be issued for >>>>> 4.11.1.0 (it will be compatible for both 4.11.0.0 and
4.11.1.0 releases, but >>>>> 4.11.0.0 users will have to register that new
template). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
- Rohit >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>
From: Andrei Mikhailovsky >>>>> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2018 11:00:34 PM >>>>>
To: users >>>>> Subject: Upgrade from ACS 4.9.3 to 4.11.0 >>>>>
>>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> My current infrastructure
is ACS 4.9.3 with KVM based on Ubuntu 16.04 servers >>>>> for the KVM hosts
and the management server. >>>>> >>>>> I am planning to perform
an upgrade from ACS 4.9.3 to 4.11.0 and was wondering >>>>> if anyone had any
issues during the upgrades? Anything to watch out for? >>>>> >>>>>
I have previously seen issues with upgrading to 4.10, which required some manual >>>>>
db updates from what I recall. Has this issue been fixed in the 4.11 upgrade >>>>>
process? >>>>> >>>>> thanks >>>>> >>>>>
Andrei >>>>> >>>>> rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com >>>>>
www.shapeblue.com >>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> > > > > @shapeblue


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message