how to redistribute static routes in bgp?
What is the configuration to be able to do this in packet tracer? Can you give an example in another way. Thank you.
Can you help me ??
copied this from a running configuration - for my experience it's best practice to use a route-map which avoids redistributing any static route.
Redistributed routes should be permitted explicitly:
conf t
ip prefix-list PL_STATIC seq 5 permit 10.10.10.0/24
ip prefix-list PL_STATIC seq 10 permit 10.10.11.00/24
route-map RM_STATIC permit 10
match ip address prefix-list PL_STATIC
router bgp 65535
redistribute static route-map RM_STATIC
end
Verify your redistribution using
show ip bgp
And - be patient with BGP it's designed for stability, not for quick reactions.
And - only "active" static routes get redistributed, they have to show up in your routing-table as "S"tatic-routes:
show ip route
Related
https://github.com/kubernetes/ingress-nginx/tree/main/docs/examples/grpc
In the above link under Prerequisites - 2nd point, it is mentioned to have a domain name configured to Ingress controller.
How to create or get a domain name in AKS?
I have a grpc application, trying to implement the same steps.
You have two Options, for both you need an own a domain Name (you can buy it at namecheap.com or godaddy.com).
First option: Switch the domain DNS resolution to Azure..
Second option: Create the AKS and add it as CNAME (AKS public FQDN, i would prefer this over using the IP) to the DNS records of your domain.
My apologies if this is a duplicate. I can find a million results about CORS policy issues, but not about this specific one:
I developed a simple "speed test" site for my users (wfh employees of my company) to access. It tests speeds across the public net to different datacenters we utilize, and via the users' VPN connection to one of our DCs.
There are more complicated elements, but for a basic round-trip "ping" I have an extremely simple PHP script on the server that contains:
<?php
header('Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *');
header('Access-Control-Allow-Headers: *');
if ($_GET['simple'] == '1')
die('{ }');
?>
It is called like this:
$.ajax({
type: 'GET',
url: sURL,
data: { ignore: (pingCounter.start = new Date().getTime()) },
dataType: 'text',
timeout: iTimeout
})
.done(function(ret) {
pingCounter.end = new Date().getTime();
[...] (additional code omitted for brevity)
(I know this has additional overhead other than the raw round-trip network traffic timing, but I don't need sub-ms accuracy. I just need to be able to tell users "the problem is on your end" or "ah yes, the problem is the latency between your house and this particular DC".)
The same server running that PHP code is addressable at the following URLs at the DC wherein our VPN server lies:
http://speedtest-int.mycompany.com/ping.php
http://speedtest-ext.mycompany.com/ping.php
Public DNS resolves like this:
speedtest-int.mycompany.com IN A 1.1.1.1 (Actual public IP redacted)
speedtest-int.mycompany.com IN A 10.1.1.1 (Actual internal IP redacted)
If I access either URL from my browser directly, it loads fine (which is to say it responds with { }).
When loading via the JS snippet above, the call to http://speedtest-ext.mycompany.com/ping.php works fine.
The call to http://speedtest-int.mycompany.com/ping.php fails with "The request client is not a secure context and the resource is in more-private address space 'private'".
Fair enough, the solution is to add Access-Control-Allow-Private-Network: *, right?
EXCEPT that apparently can only be used with SSL:
https://developer.chrome.com/blog/private-network-access-update/
I have a self-signed cert on there, but that obviously fails by policy for that reason.
I could just get a LetsEncrypt cert for multiple subdomains. EXCEPT it will never validate the URL http://speedtest-int.mycompany.com because the LetsEncrypt servers won't be able to reach that to validate ownership, as it's a private IP.
I have no control over most of my users' machines, so I can't necessarily install trusted internal certs or change browser options. Most users use Chrome.
So is my solution to buy a UCC or wildcard cert?
I feel like I'm in a catch-22, and I don't want to spend however-much on a UCC cert for an internal app that will be very very very occasionally used by one of our 25 home-based employees when I want to prove that their home "internet is bad" and not the corp network.
Thanks in advance; I'm sure there's a stupidly obvious solution I'm not seeing.
(I'm considering pushing a /32 route to my VPN users for another real public IP to be used in place of the internal IP. Then I can have the "internal" test run against an otherwise publicly accessible IP which could be validated by LetsEncrypt, but VPN users would hit it via the VPN. Is that silly?)
Edit: If anyone is curious -- or it helps to clarify my goal here -- this is the output when accessing the speedtest page:
http://s.co.tt/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Internal_Speedtest_Example-Redacted.png
It repeats for 20 cycles (or until stopped) and runs each element a varying number of times per cycle, collecting the average time for each. It ain't pretty, but it work(ed).
What would happen in Varnish if multiple IPs are in an X-Forward-For header which is compared to an ACL using the tilde operator?
Dummy example:
The request has the following HTTP header:
X-Forward-For: 160.12.34.56, 10.10.10.10
The Varnish config looks like this:
acl internal {
"10.10.10.10"
}
if ((std.ip(req.http.X-Forward.For, "0.0.0.0") ~ internal)){
# THIS CODE
}
else {
# OR THIS CODE
}
Which code block is executed?
Also, does the order of the IPs matter in the X-Forward-For header?
Does it change if there are 2 X-Forward-For headers, each with one of the two IPs?
Will it work?
The short answer to your question is no, it won't work.
std.ip() expects to receive a single IP address, not a collection. The conversion will fail, and the fallback value (second argument of the function) will be returned.
Here's a quick test script that illustrates this:
vcl 4.0;
import std;
backend default none;
sub vcl_recv {
set req.http.x-f = "1.2.3.4, 5.6.7.8";
return(synth(200,std.ip(req.http.x-f,"0.0.0.0")));
}
This example will return 0.0.0.0.
Does X-Forwarded-For need multiple IP addresses?
It does make sense to ask the question if your X-Forwarded-For header needs multiple IP addresses.
The idea is to indicate to the origin server what the IP address of the original client was.
In your case there is more than 1 proxy in front of the webserver, so a natural reaction is to chain the IP addresses in the X-Forwarded-For header.
A better solution would be to figure out what the IP address of the original client was, and set that value in X-Forwarded-For.
The best way to get this done is by leveraging the PROXY protocol, which Varnish supports.
Leverage the PROXY protocol
The PROXY protocol has the capability of transporting the HTTP protocol, but additionally keep track of the connection parameters of the original client.
Varnish supports this and allows you to set an extra listening port that listens for PROXY requests.
Here's an example of how you can start varnishd with PROXY support:
varnishd -a :80 -a :8443,PROXY -f /etc/varnish/default.vcl -s malloc,256m
As you can see, port 80 is still available for regular HTTP, but port 8443 was allocated for PROXY support.
If the proxy servers in front of Varnish support PROXY, Varnish will take the value from the original client and automatically set X-Forwarded-For with that value.
This way you always know who the client was, and you can safely perform your ACL check.
Additionally, there's also a PROXY module for Varnish, that can give you information about potential TLS termination that took place in front of Varnish.
i configured an egress router like described here:
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/3.3/admin_guide/managing_pods.html#admin-guide-controlling-egress-traffic
But it does not work.
In my understanding, the options will be resolved like this:
name: EGRESS_SOURCE <-- This is the network where the nodes live (in my case the vm where the Containers are running on)
value: 192.168.12.99
name: EGRESS_GATEWAY <-- The gateway over which the destination ip address is routable.
value: 192.168.12.1
name: EGRESS_DESTINATION <--- The destination ip of the application i want to reach. In my case its a mongoDB living in a classical VM.
value: 203.0.113.25
Am i right or do i miss something ?
How would i be able to reach the target ?
Do i need to address the source ip to access the MongoDB or do i simply address the IP of my MongoDB an the traffic gets nat'd the way over my egress router (This is how i understood the traffic flow will be btw.) ?
How can i troubleshoot this kind of problem ?
Best Regards,
Marcus
Ok, it worked by now. I created a service and adressed the ip of this service to reach my destination.
The alternative way is to address the ip of the container.
So from inside the container to reach your original destination don't use the original ip, rather use the egress pod ip or preferred use the ip of the created service.
!!Attention: The destination ip must be outside of the host/node ip range otherwise it would not work. It seems that, if you use a destination ip from your host/node range, the standard gw will get the request and i think it will discard it. !!
And i would suggest to use the egress router image from redhat, instead the origin, which is stated in the official document from redhat...
image: registry.access.redhat.com/openshift3/ose-egress-router
If we have a customer with a cname record, sub1.notourserver.com, pointing to something like abcdefg.ourserver.com, we read the host as sub1.notoursever.com. Is it possible for us to somehow get the value abcdefg.ourserver.com from this request? We have a subdomain route setup, but it is not picking up on it because the host does not match our SERVER_NAME config setting.
HTTPÂ does not provide that information, and so neither can Flask/Werkzeug. You need to use in Flask/Werkzeug the (sub)domain names actually used by clients.
If you really can not do that, you need to hack a WSGI middleware that maintains an explicit mapping (or makes DNS requests) and patches environ['HTTP_HOST'].