![]() Idea is that packets are handled in the following way on each VLAN: In myĬase, I spent lots of time trying to get that to work on the CiscoĪssuming that traffic reaches the LVS pair on both VLAN 10 and 20, the Have the router do SNAT/masquerading of the incoming packets. Pointing the virtual IP towards the LVS VIP on each VLAN.Īn obvious and easy solution to the overlapping subnets, would be to These VRF instances will in turn have separate routing tables, (virtual routing and forwarding) instance 10, and tunnel B to VRF 20. Short, a crypto map is defined so that tunnel A is mapped to VRF This approach is common in Cisco routers by using VRF-aware IPSec. Separate egress interfaces, or using IPSec VPNs, like in the diagram: Isn't really important the remote sites can be directly connected on The router maps each remote site to its own VLAN. Combine VLANs with interface bonding to achieveĪn even higher degree of resilience against failures. While you can use individual network interfaces, using VLANs saves So in short, it combines a two-node, multi-interface lvs To a unique IP range so that users can be identified in application This setup solves the challenge of serving remote users that originateįrom multiple different sites that all use the same overlapping Netfilter connection tracking for lvs/ipvs (v2.6.37, commit).Netfilter nat INPUT chain, NETMAP changes (v2.6.36, commit).Connection tracking zones (v2.6.34, commit).Accept incoming packets with local source (v2.6.33, commit).In particular, itĭepends on the following recent features: I'll keep you posted about the developments.This setup requires kernel version 2.6.37 or newer. Latter is also a bit related to the former. Our initial focus is fixing the reliability problems. iflib work, although it creates a bit of headache now, has great implications for the future, which we'll all enjoy in the mid and long term. The latest test kernel looks very promising. OPNsense version of 12.1 is likely to be more stable than the upstream. OPNsense team has been very cooperative and hard-working in trying to incorporate suggested commits. We have sponsored another round of work on netmap side for new drivers and these bug-fixes. Resources for open source projects can be constrained, so we're helping OPNsense team to create a netmap-iflib-stable kernel. I guess OPNsense team will be delivering these fixes with the upcoming releases. Good news is, we've come a long way in this short period of time. It was mostly incompatible with the new iflib code. The other thing is this refactoring also severely affected netmap system. When I look at stable/12 commits, I can still - from time to time - see fixes for major issues. Real problem is that iflib(4), the new network interface subsystem in FreeBSD, received a code refactoring. This difference might also be a testing error. We found a %1-%2 difference between a FreeBSD 12/Stable kernel and stock OPNsense 20.7 kernel. That being said, for our tests, I can say that HardenedBSD did not have any significant effect. Results can greatly vary in each particular test setting where one or more variable can affect the total throughput. There is a bunch of variables: OS, firewall hardware, ethernet adapter, ethernet adapter compatibility with netmap, test tool, test hardware, test device connectivity (wi-fi, wired), ISP being used etc. For a month now, we've been doing a lot of testing on quite many deployments, hardware etc.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |