From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
To: seba@econ.uba.ar
Cc: netfilter@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: VRF + Netfilter deployment - multitenancy filtering box
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 21:43:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161027194355.GB1257@salvia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c847aa653f58c75da5717819ff0f861b.squirrel@minkevie.econ.uba.ar>
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 11:45:05AM -0300, seba@econ.uba.ar wrote:
> Hi, I'm trying to deploy VRFs + Netfilter in a such a way I could maintain
> different filtering rules while attaining isolated traffic at Layer 3, and
> perhaps some overlapping IPs functionality.
>
> Even though there's some VRF + NF Kernel documentation, I could use some
> help from the netfilter community; and I think lack of information
> regarding this topic is due to only recent kernels (>4.6 will do the
> sucessful magic!) aren't massive today, but it'll be a hot issue when this
> kernel reaches production level.
>
> Here's what I'm looking after:
>
> +
> ^ |
> | |
> | v
> |
> +--+------+
> | | 172.17.0.0/16
> | eth0 |
> | |
> +---^-----+
> +---------------^ | ^-----------+
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> +---v------+ +----v-----+ +--v--------+
> | | | | | |
> | RED | | BLUE | | GREEN |
> | eth1 | | eth2 | | eth3 |
> | | | | | |
> +----------+ +----------+ +-----------+
> 10.0.0.0/24 10.0.0.0/24 10.0.0.0/24
>
>
> Suppose you have an shared & physical interface which leads traffic inside
> and outside our box, serving three customers RED, GREEN & BLUE through
> dedicated physical internal interfaces, at the same time we're mantaining
> their traffic isolated from each other at layer 3 using VRFs (and maybe,
> later permit Overlapping IPs between customers if possible).
>
> I'm considering creating three VRF devices and attaching each different
> customer interfaces to them at the same time I attach eth0 to all the VRF
> devices, then deploy NAT rules through iptables in order to get the
> traffic flow in the desired direction...
>
> How would it be your filtering strategy in order to achieve some sort of
> "VRF/multitenant" filtering ability? Filtering rules in each vrf device
> it's the only way or I'm missing something?
Did you consider using conntrack zones for this?
See iptables-extensions(8) manpages, more specifically the CT target.
You can set the zone from raw/prerouting chain.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-27 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-10 14:45 VRF + Netfilter deployment - multitenancy filtering box seba
2016-10-27 19:43 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso [this message]
2016-10-28 1:05 ` seba
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161027194355.GB1257@salvia \
--to=pablo@netfilter.org \
--cc=netfilter@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=seba@econ.uba.ar \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox