标签 Trace 下的文章

使用istio治理微服务入门

近两年微服务架构流行,主流互联网厂商内部都已经微服务化,初创企业虽然技术积淀不行,但也通过各种开源工具拥抱微服务。再加上容器技术赋能,Kubernetes又添了一把火,微服务架构已然成为当前软件架构设计的首选。

但微服务化易弄,服务治理难搞!

一、微服务的“痛点”

微服务化没有统一标准,多数是进行业务领域垂直切分,业务按一定的粒度划分职责,并形成清晰、职责单一的服务接口,这样每一块规划为一个微服务。微服务之间的通信方案相对成熟,开源领域选择较多的有RPC或RESTful API方案,比如:gRPCapache thrift等。这些方案多偏重于数据如何打包、传输与解包,对服务治理的内容涉及甚少。

微服务治理是头疼的事,也是微服务架构中的痛点治理这个词有多元含义,很难下达一个精确定义,这里可以像小学二年级学生那样列出治理的诸多近义词:管理、控制、规则、掌控、监督、支配、规定、统治等。对于微服务而言,治理体现在以下诸多方面:

  • 服务注册与发现
  • 身份验证与授权
  • 服务的伸缩控制
  • 反向代理与负载均衡
  • 路由控制
  • 流量切换
  • 日志管理
  • 性能度量、监控与调优
  • 分布式跟踪
  • 过载保护
  • 服务降级
  • 服务部署与版本升级策略支持
  • 错误处理
  • … …

从微服务治理角度来说,微服务其实是一个“大系统”,要想将这个大系统全部落地,绝非易事,尤其是之前尚没有一种特别优雅的技术方案。多数方案(比如:dubbogo-kit等。)都或多或少地对应用逻辑有一定的侵入性,让业务开发人员不能只focus到业务本身,还要关心那些“治理”逻辑。并且市面上内置了微服务治理逻辑的框架较少,且很多编程语言相关。这种情况下,大厂多选择自研或基于某个框架改造,小厂一般只能“东拼西凑”一些“半成品”凑合着使用,就这样微服务也走过了若干年。

二、Service Mesh横空出世,istio带来“福音”

我不知道在没有TCP/IP协议的年代,主机和主机之间的应用通信时是否需要应用关心底层通信协议实现逻辑。但是和TCP/IP诞生的思想类似,在微服务使用多年后,人们发现需要独立地抽象出一层逻辑网络,专门用于“微服务通信与治理策略的落地”,让应用只关心业务,把服务治理的事情全部交由“这一层”去处理。

img{512x368}
图:传统微服务之间的微服务治理逻辑的位置

img{512x368}
图:微服务治理逻辑被独立出来之后的位置

由“Service Govern Logic”这一层组成的逻辑网络被定义为service mesh,每个微服务都包含一个service mesh的端点。

“Service Mesh”概念还非常年轻,这个词在国内被翻译为“服务网格”或“服务啮合层”,我们这里就用Service Mesh这个英文词。这里摘录一下ServiceMesh中文社区上的一篇名为“年度盘点2017之Service Mesh:群雄逐鹿烽烟起”的文章中对Service Mesh概念的回顾:

  • 在 2016 年年初,“Service Mesh”还只是 Buoyant 公司的内部词汇,而之后,它开始逐步走向社区:
  • 2016 年 9 月 29 日在 SF Microservices 上,“Service Mesh”这个词汇第一次在公开场合被使用。这标志着“Service Mesh”这个词,从 Buoyant 公司走向社区。
  • 2016 年 10 月,Alex Leong 开始在 Buoyant 公司的官方 Blog 中连载系列文章“A Service Mesh for Kubernetes”。随着“The Services must Mesh”口号的喊出,Buoyant 和 Linkerd 开始 Service Mesh 概念的布道。
  • 2017 年 4 月 25 日,William Morgan 发布博文“What’s a service mesh? And why do I need one?”。正式给 Service Mesh 做了一个权威定义。

而Service Mesh真正引起大家关注要源于istio项目的开源发布。为什么呢?个人觉得还是因为“爹好”!istio项目由Google、IBM共同合作创建,lyft公司贡献了envoy项目将作为istio service mesh的data panel。Google、IBM的影响力让Service Mesh概念迅速传播,同时也让大家认识到了istio项目在service mesh领域的重要性,于是纷纷选择积极支持并将自己的产品或项目与istio项目集成。

istio项目是service mesh概念的最新实现,旨在所有主流集群管理平台上提供service mesh层,初期以实现Kubernetes上的服务治理层为目标。它由控制平面和数据平面组成(是不是感觉和SDN的设计理念相似啊)。控制平面由Go语言实现,包括pilot、mixer、auth三个组件;数据平面功能暂由envoy在pod中以sidecar的部署形式提供。下面是官方的架构图:

img{512x368}
图:istio架构图(来自官网)

sidecar中envoy代理了pod中真正业务container的所有进出流量,并对这些流量按照控制平面设定的“治理逻辑”进行处理。而这一切对pod中的业务应用是透明的,开发人员可以专心于业务逻辑,而无需再关心微服务治理的逻辑。istio代表的service mesh的设计理念被认为是下一代“微服务统一框架”,甚至有人认为是微服务框架演化的终点。

istio于2017 年 5 月 24 日发布了0.1 release 版本,截至目前为止istio的版本更新到v0.4.0,演进速度相当快,不过目前依然不要用于生产环境,至少要等到1.0版本发布吧。但对于istio的早期接纳者而言,现在正是深入研究istio的好时机。在本篇的接下来内容中,我们将带领大家感性的认识一下istio,入个门儿。

三、istio安装

istio目前支持最好的就是kubernetes了,因此我们的实验环境就定在kubernetes上。至于版本,istio当前最新版本为0.4.0,这个版本据说要k8s 1.7.4及以上版本用起来才不会发生小毛病:)。我的k8s集群是v1.7.6版本的,恰好满足条件。下面是安装过程:(Node上的os是ubuntu 16.04)

# wget -c https://github.com/istio/istio/releases/download/0.4.0/istio-0.4.0-linux.tar.gz

解压后,进入istio-0.4.0目录,

# ls -F
bin/  install/  istio.VERSION  LICENSE  README.md  samples/

# cat istio.VERSION
# DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE MANUALLY instead use
# install/updateVersion.sh (see install/README.md)
export CA_HUB="docker.io/istio"
export CA_TAG="0.4.0"
export MIXER_HUB="docker.io/istio"
export MIXER_TAG="0.4.0"
export PILOT_HUB="docker.io/istio"
export PILOT_TAG="0.4.0"
export ISTIOCTL_URL="https://storage.googleapis.com/istio-release/releases/0.4.0/istioctl"
export PROXY_TAG="0.4.0"
export ISTIO_NAMESPACE="istio-system"
export AUTH_DEBIAN_URL="https://storage.googleapis.com/istio-release/releases/0.4.0/deb"
export PILOT_DEBIAN_URL="https://storage.googleapis.com/istio-release/releases/0.4.0/deb"
export PROXY_DEBIAN_URL="https://storage.googleapis.com/istio-release/releases/0.4.0/deb"
export FORTIO_HUB="docker.io/istio"
export FORTIO_TAG="0.4.2"

# cd install/kubernetes

我们先不用auth功能,因此使用istio.yaml这个文件进行istio组件安装:

# kubectl apply -f istio.yaml
namespace "istio-system" created
clusterrole "istio-pilot-istio-system" created
clusterrole "istio-initializer-istio-system" created
clusterrole "istio-mixer-istio-system" created
clusterrole "istio-ca-istio-system" created
clusterrole "istio-sidecar-istio-system" created
clusterrolebinding "istio-pilot-admin-role-binding-istio-system" created
clusterrolebinding "istio-initializer-admin-role-binding-istio-system" created
clusterrolebinding "istio-ca-role-binding-istio-system" created
clusterrolebinding "istio-ingress-admin-role-binding-istio-system" created
clusterrolebinding "istio-sidecar-role-binding-istio-system" created
clusterrolebinding "istio-mixer-admin-role-binding-istio-system" created
configmap "istio-mixer" created
service "istio-mixer" created
serviceaccount "istio-mixer-service-account" created
deployment "istio-mixer" created
customresourcedefinition "rules.config.istio.io" created
customresourcedefinition "attributemanifests.config.istio.io" created
... ...
customresourcedefinition "reportnothings.config.istio.io" created
attributemanifest "istioproxy" created
attributemanifest "kubernetes" created
stdio "handler" created
logentry "accesslog" created
rule "stdio" created
metric "requestcount" created
metric "requestduration" created
metric "requestsize" created
metric "responsesize" created
metric "tcpbytesent" created
metric "tcpbytereceived" created
prometheus "handler" created
rule "promhttp" created
rule "promtcp" created
kubernetesenv "handler" created
rule "kubeattrgenrulerule" created
kubernetes "attributes" created
configmap "istio" created
customresourcedefinition "destinationpolicies.config.istio.io" created
customresourcedefinition "egressrules.config.istio.io" created
customresourcedefinition "routerules.config.istio.io" created
service "istio-pilot" created
serviceaccount "istio-pilot-service-account" created
deployment "istio-pilot" created
service "istio-ingress" created
serviceaccount "istio-ingress-service-account" created
deployment "istio-ingress" created
serviceaccount "istio-ca-service-account" created
deployment "istio-ca" created

注:我还曾在k8s v1.7.3上安装过istio 0.3.0版本,但在创建组件时会报下面错误(这个错误可能会导致后续addon安装后工作不正常):

unable to recognize "istio.yaml": no matches for config.istio.io/, Kind=metric
unable to recognize "istio.yaml": no matches for config.istio.io/, Kind=metric
unable to recognize "istio.yaml": no matches for config.istio.io/, Kind=metric
unable to recognize "istio.yaml": no matches for config.istio.io/, Kind=metric
unable to recognize "istio.yaml": no matches for config.istio.io/, Kind=metric
unable to recognize "istio.yaml": no matches for config.istio.io/, Kind=metric

安装后,我们在istio-system这个namespace下会看到如下pod和service在运行(由于istio的各个组件的image size都不小,因此pod状态变为running需要一丢丢时间,耐心等待):

# kubectl get pods -n istio-system
NAME                             READY     STATUS    RESTARTS   AGE
istio-ca-1363003450-jskp5        1/1       Running   0          3d
istio-ingress-1005666339-c7776   1/1       Running   4          3d
istio-mixer-465004155-twhxq      3/3       Running   24         3d
istio-pilot-1861292947-6v37w     2/2       Running   18         3d

# kubectl get svc -n istio-system
NAME            CLUSTER-IP       EXTERNAL-IP   PORT(S)                                                   AGE
istio-ingress   10.98.10.87      <pending>     80:31759/TCP,443:25804/TCP                         4d
istio-mixer     10.109.244.155   <none>        9091/TCP,15004/TCP,9093/TCP,9094/TCP,9102/TCP,9125/UDP,42422/TCP   4d
istio-pilot     10.105.80.55     <none>        15003/TCP,443/TCP                                              4d

istio安装成功!

四、服务治理策略验证

接下来我们来用几个例子验证一下istio在服务治理方面的能力!(istio自带一些完整的例子,比如bookinfo,用于验证服务治理的能力,但这里先不打算用这些例子)

1、验证环境和拓扑

我们先来看一下验证环境的示意图:
img{512x368}

我们看到在service mesh中部署了两个service: server_a和service_b,前者调用后者完成某项业务,后者则调用外部服务完成业务逻辑。

  • service_a: 模拟pay服务,在收到client请求后,进行pay处理,并将处理结果通过service_b提供的msg notify服务下发给user。该服务的endpoint为/pay;
  • service_b: 模拟notify服务,在收到service_a请求后,将message转发给external service,完成notify逻辑。该服务的endpoint为/notify;
  • external service: 位于service mesh之外。
  • client:我们使用curl模拟。

img{512x368}

我们先来部署service_a和service_b的v0.1版本:

以service_a的部署为例, service_a的deployment文件如下:

//svca-v0.1.yaml
apiVersion: extensions/v1beta1
kind: Deployment
metadata:
  name: svca
spec:
  replicas: 1
  template:
    metadata:
      labels:
        app: svca
        version: v0.1
    spec:
      containers:
      - name: svca
        image: docker.io/bigwhite/istio-demo-svca:v0.1
        imagePullPolicy: Always
---
apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
  name: svca
  labels:
    app: svca
spec:
  ports:
  - port: 80
    targetPort: 8080
    protocol: TCP
  selector:
    app: svca

注意,我们部署service_a时不能直接使用kubectl apply -f svca-v0.1.yaml,而是要apply经过istioctl(需将istio安装目录下的bin放入PATH)处理过的yaml,以注入sidecar容器。当然也可以配置为自动为每个k8s启动的pod注入sidecar,但我们这里没有使用自动注入。我们执行下面命令:

# kubectl apply -f <(istioctl kube-inject -f svca-v0.1.yaml)
deployment "svca" created
service "svca" created

# kubectl get pods
NAME                               READY     STATUS    RESTARTS   AGE
svca-1997590752-tpwjf              2/2       Running   0          2m

同样的方法,我们来创建svcb:v0.1:

# kubectl apply -f <(istioctl kube-inject -f svcb-v0.1.yaml)
deployment "svcb" created
service "svcb" created

我们看到istio向每个pod中插入一个sidecar container,这个就是前面说的envoy,只不过container名字为istio-proxy。

接下来,我们把那个external service启动起来:

# nohup ./msgd > 1.log & 2>&1
[1] 9423

实验环境ok了。下面我们来验证一下业务是否是通的。

2、egress rule

按照之前我们的设定,我们使用curl去访问service_a服务的/pay端点,我们查看一下svca服务的ip和端口:

# kubectl get svc
NAME               CLUSTER-IP       EXTERNAL-IP   PORT(S)
svca               10.105.38.238    <none>        80/TCP                                         9h
svcb               10.105.119.194   <none>        80/TCP                                         9h

我们访问一下svca服务,svca的服务地址可以通过kubectl get svc查到:

# curl {svca_ip}/pay

查看svca和svcb的日志:

//service_a的日志:

service_a:v0.1 is serving the request...
service_a:v0.1 pays ok
&{500 Internal Server Error 500 HTTP/1.1 1 1 map[X-Content-Type-Options:[nosniff] Date:[Tue, 02 Jan 2018 15:41:50 GMT] Content-Length:[66] Content-Type:[text/plain; charset=utf-8]] 0xc420058d40 66 [] false false map[] 0xc4200eaf00 <nil>}
service_a:v0.1 notify customer ok

// service_b的日志:
&{GET /notify?msg=service_a:v0.1-pays-ok HTTP/1.1 1 1 map[User-Agent:[Go-http-client/1.1] Accept-Encoding:[gzip]] {} <nil> 0 [] false svcb map[] map[] <nil> map[] 127.0.0.1:58778 /notify?msg=service_a:v0.1-pays-ok <nil> <nil> <nil> 0xc4200fa3c0}
service_b:v0.1 is serving the request...
service_b:v0.1 send msg error: Get http://10.100.35.27:9997/send?msg=service_a:v0.1-pays-ok: EOF

我们看到service_a和service_b都返回了错误日志(注意:go http get方法对于non-2xx response不会返回错误,我们只是看到了response中的500状态码才意识到错误的存在)。其中源头在service_b,原因是其连不上那个external service!那么为什么连不上external service呢?这是由于缺省情况下,启用了Istio的服务是无法访问外部URL的,这是因为Pod中的iptables把所有外发传输都转向到了Sidecar代理,而这一代理只处理集群内的访问目标。因此位于service mesh内的服务svcb无法访问外部的服务(msgd),我们需要显式的添加egressrule规则:

我们创建一个允许svcb访问外部特定服务的EgressRule:

//rules/enable-svcb-engress-rule.yaml

apiVersion: config.istio.io/v1alpha2
kind: EgressRule
metadata:
  name: enable-svcb-engress-rule
spec:
  destination:
    service: 10.100.35.27
  ports:
    - port: 9997
      protocol: http

使规则生效:

# istioctl create -f enable-svcb-engress-rule.yaml
Created config egress-rule/default/enable-svcb-engress-rule at revision 30031258

这时你再尝试curl svca,我们可以看到msgd的日志中出现了下面的内容:

2018/01/02 23:58:16 &{GET /send?msg=service_a:v0.1-pays-ok HTTP/1.1 1 1 map[X-Ot-Span-Context:[2157e7ffb8105330;2157e7ffb8105330;0000000000000000] Content-Length:[0] User-Agent:[Go-http-client/1.1] X-Forwarded-Proto:[http] X-Request-Id:[13c3af6e-2f52-993d-905f-aa6aa4b57e2d] X-Envoy-Decorator-Operation:[default-route] X-B3-Spanid:[2157e7ffb8105330] X-B3-Sampled:[1] Accept-Encoding:[gzip] X-B3-Traceid:[2157e7ffb8105330] X-Istio-Attributes:[Ch8KCXNvdXJjZS5pcBISMhAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//8KLgAMCjoKCnNvdXJjZS51aWQSLBIqa3ViZXJuZXRlczovL3N2Y2ItMjAwODk3Mzc2OS1ncTBsaC5kZWZhdWx0]] {} <nil> 0 [] false 10.100.35.27:9997 map[] map[] <nil> map[] 10.100.35.28:38188 /send?msg=service_a:v0.1-pays-ok <nil> <nil> <nil> 0xc4200584c0}
2018/01/02 23:58:16 Msgd is serving the request...
2018/01/02 23:58:16 Msgd recv msg ok, msg= service_a:v0.1-pays-ok

说明Svcb到外部服务的通信被打通了!

3、迁移流量到新版本svcb:v0.2

我们经常有这样的需求,当svcb运行一段时间后,svcb添加了新feature,版本要升级到v0.2了,这时我们会部署svcb:v0.2,并将流量逐步切到v0.2上。

我们先来部署一下svcb:v0.2:

// svcb-v0.2.yaml
apiVersion: extensions/v1beta1
kind: Deployment
metadata:
  name: svcb-v0.2
spec:
  replicas: 1
  template:
    metadata:
      labels:
        app: svcb
        version: v0.2
    spec:
      containers:
      - name: svcb
        image: docker.io/bigwhite/istio-demo-svcb:v0.2
        imagePullPolicy: Always

我们可以看到,服务名不变,但版本的label变成了v0.2,我们来执行这次部署:

# kubectl apply -f <(istioctl kube-inject -f svcb-v0.2.yaml)
deployment "svcb-v0.2" created

# kubectl get pods
NAME                               READY     STATUS    RESTARTS   AGE
svca-1997590752-pq9zg              2/2       Running   0          9h
svcb-2008973769-gq0lh              2/2       Running   0          9h
svcb-v0.2-3233505404-0g55w         2/2       Running   0          1m

svcb服务下又增加了一个endpoint:

# kubectl describe svc/svcb

.... ...
Selector:        app=svcb
Type:            ClusterIP
IP:            10.105.119.194
Port:            <unset>    80/TCP
Endpoints:        10.40.0.28:8080,10.46.0.12:8080
... ...

此时,如果按照k8s的调度方式,v0.1和v0.2版本的两个svcb pod应该1:1均衡地承载流量。为了方便查看流量分布,我们将每个版本的svcb的pod副本数量都扩展为2个(replicas: 2),这样service mesh中一共会有4个 svcb endpoints。

通过curl访问svca注入流量后,我们发现流量都集中在一个svcb:v0.2的pod上,并且长时间没有变化。我们通过下面的route rule规则来尝试将流量在svcb:v0.1和svcb:v0.2之间1:1均衡:

// route-rules-svcb-v0.2-50.yaml
apiVersion: config.istio.io/v1alpha2
kind: RouteRule
metadata:
  name: route-rules-svcb
spec:
  destination:
    name: svcb
  precedence: 1
  route:
  - labels:
      version: v0.1
    weight: 50
  - labels:
      version: v0.2
    weight: 50

# istioctl create -f route-rules-svcb-v0.2-50.yaml
Created config route-rule/default/route-rules-svcb at revision 30080638

按照istio文档中的说法,这个规则的生效需要一些时间。之后我们注入流量,发现流量切换到svcb:v0.1的一个pod上去了,并且很长一段时间不曾变化,未均衡到svcb:v0.2上去。

我们更新一下route rule,将流量全部切到svcb:v0.2上去:

//route-rules-svcb-v0.2-100.yaml
apiVersion: config.istio.io/v1alpha2
kind: RouteRule
metadata:
  name: route-rules-svcb
spec:
  destination:
    name: svcb
  precedence: 1
  route:
  - labels:
      version: v0.2
    weight: 100

# istioctl replace -f route-rules-svcb-v0.2-100.yaml
Updated config route-rule/default/route-rules-svcb to revision 30082944

我们用istio的replace命令更新了规则:route-rules-svcb。更新后,再次注入流量,这回流量重新集中在svcb:v0.2的一个pod上了,再过一段时间另外一个svcb:v0.2的pod上才有了一些流量。但svcb:v0.1上不再有流量,这个切换是成功的。

在k8s的service的负载均衡中,k8s就利用了iptables的概率转发(random –probability 0.5),因此这种流量均衡并非是精确的,只有在长时间大量流量经过后,才能看到流量的分布与设定的权重是相似的,可能istio也是如此,这里仅是入门,就不深入挖掘了。

当然istio在路由规则设施方面的“能耐”远不止上面例子中所展示的那样,如果要悉数列出,那本文的长度可是要爆掉了。有兴趣的朋友可以去翻看官方文档

五、插件安装

istio的强大微服务治理能力还体现在其集成了grafanaprometheus、servicegraph、zipkin等addons,应用程序无需做任何改动,就可以具有数据收集、度量与可视化的监控能力、服务的分布式跟踪能力等。我们可以在istio的安装包中找到这些addons的安装文件,我们来逐一试试。

1、prometheus & grafana

我们先来安装一下prometheus 和 grafana插件(位于istio-0.4.0/install/kubernetes/addon下面):

# kubectl apply -f prometheus.yaml
configmap "prometheus" created
service "prometheus" created
deployment "prometheus" created

# kubectl apply -f grafana.yaml
service "grafana" created
deployment "grafana" created

# kubectl get pods -n istio-system
NAME                             READY     STATUS    RESTARTS   AGE
grafana-3617079618-zpglx         1/1       Running   0          5m
prometheus-168775884-ppfxr       1/1       Running   0          5m
... ...

# kubectl get svc -n istio-system
NAME            CLUSTER-IP       EXTERNAL-IP   PORT(S)            AGE
grafana         10.105.21.25     <none>        3000/TCP                     16m
prometheus      10.103.160.37    <none>        9090/TCP                16m
... ...

浏览器中输入prometheus的服务地址http://10.103.160.37:9090,访问prometheus:

img{512x368}

点击菜单项:status -> targets,查看各个target的状态是否正常:

img{512x368}

如果像上图所示那样,各个target都是up状态,那就说明istio运行时ok的。否则请参考istio troubleshooting中的内容对istio逐一进行排查,尤其是istio-mesh这个Target在istio-0.3.0+kubernetes 1.7.3的环境中就是Down的状态。

浏览器输入grafana的服务地址:http://10.105.21.25:3000/,打开grafana面板:

img{512x368}

切换到Istio Dashboard,并向istio service mesh注入流量,我们会看到仪表盘变化如下:

img{512x368}

img{512x368}

2、servicegraph

servicegraph插件是用来查看服务调用关系的,我们来创建一下该组件:

# kubectl apply -f servicegraph.yaml
deployment "servicegraph" created
service "servicegraph" created

# kubectl get svc -n istio-system
NAME            CLUSTER-IP       EXTERNAL-IP   PORT(S)                 AGE
servicegraph    10.108.245.21    <none>        8088/TCP                     52s
... ...

创建成功后,向service mesh网络注入流量,然后访问servicegraph:http://{servicegraph_ip}:8088/dotviz,在我的环境里,我看到的图示如下:

img{512x368}

调用关系似乎有些乱,难道是我在程序使用的调用方法不够标准?:(

3、zipkin

istio集成了zipkin,利用zipkin我们可以做分布式服务调用的追踪。之前自己曾经搭建过基于jaegeropentracing的分布式调用服务,十分繁琐。并且要想使用tracing,对应用代码的侵入必不可少。

我们安装一下zipkin addon:

# kubectl apply -f zipkin.yaml
deployment "zipkin" created
service "zipkin" created

# kubectl get svc -n istio-system
NAME            CLUSTER-IP       EXTERNAL-IP   PORT(S)                  AGE
zipkin          10.105.7.219     <none>        9411/TCP                             1h

我们访问以下zikpin的UI,通过浏览器打开http://{zipkin_service_ip}:9411。

img{512x368}

接下来,我们向service mesh注入一些流量,然后再zipkin首页的“服务名”下拉框中选择”svcb”,查找跟踪情况:

img{512x368}

我们看到:在没有对svca, svcb做任何修改的情况下,我们依然可以在zipkin中找到svcb相关的调用。点击其中一个trace,可以查看细节:

img{512x368}

当然如果你想做内容更为丰富的、更为强大的跟踪,可能需要在应用代码中做些配合,具体可以参见:istio的分布式跟踪

六、小结

istio项目诞生不到一年,目前离成熟还远。快速积极开发可能会导致istio的接口和实现机制都会发生很大的变化,因此本文不能保证内容将适用于后续所有istio的发布版本

本文涉及到的源码在这里可以下载到,demo service的镜像可以在我的docker hub上pull

更多内容可以通过我在慕课网开设的实战课程《Kubernetes实战 高可用集群搭建、配置、运维与应用》学习。


微博:@tonybai_cn
微信公众号:iamtonybai
github.com: https://github.com/bigwhite

微信赞赏:
img{512x368}

再谈Docker容器单机网络:利用iptables trace和ebtables log

这大半年一直在搞Kubernetes。每次搭建Kubernetes集群,或多或少都会被Kubernetes的“网络插件们”折腾折腾。因此,要说目前Kubernetes中最难搞的是什么?个人觉得莫过于其Pod网络了,至少也是最难搞的之一。除此之外,以Service和Pod为中心的Kubernetes架构还大量利用iptables规则来实现Service的反向代理和负载均衡,这又与Docker原生容器单机网络实现所基于的linux bridgeiptables规则糅合在一起,让troubleshooting时的难度又增加了一些。

去年曾经花过一段研究Docker网络,但现在看来当时在某些关键环节的理解上还有些模糊,于是花了周末的闲暇时间对Docker容器单机网络做了一次再理解。这次重新认识利用上了iptables的Trace功能以及数据链路层的ebtables,让我可以更清晰地看到单机容器网络的网络数据流流向。同时,有了容器网络理解这个基础,对后续解决K8s Pod网络问题也是大有裨益的。

本文从某个角度来说也可以理解为自我答疑,我不会从最最基础的Docker网络结构说起,对Docker容器单机网络结构不了解的童鞋,可以先看看我之前写的《理解Docker单机容器网络》和《理解Docker容器网络之Linux Network Namespace》两篇文章。

一、实验环境

1、主机环境和工具版本

Docker的默认单机容器网络从最初的版本开始就几乎没有变过,因此理论上下面的分析适用于Docker的大部分版本。我的实验环境如下:

Ubuntu 16.04.3 LTS (GNU/Linux 4.4.0-63-generic x86_64)

# docker version
Client:
 Version:      17.09.0-ce
 API version:  1.32
 Go version:   go1.8.3
 Git commit:   afdb6d4
 Built:        Tue Sep 26 22:42:18 2017
 OS/Arch:      linux/amd64

Server:
 Version:      17.09.0-ce
 API version:  1.32 (minimum version 1.12)
 Go version:   go1.8.3
 Git commit:   afdb6d4
 Built:        Tue Sep 26 22:40:56 2017
 OS/Arch:      linux/amd64
 Experimental: false

# iptables --version
iptables v1.6.0
# ebtables --version
ebtables v2.0.10-4 (December 2011)

2、容器网络及拓扑

我们需要制作一个用于实验的容器镜像。因为这里仅用ping包进行测试,这里我们仅基于ubuntu:14.04 base image制作一个简单的安装有必要网络工具的image:

//Dockerfile

From ubuntu:14.04
RUN apt-get update && apt-get install -y curl iptables
ENTRYPOINT ["tail", "-f", "/var/log/bootstrap.log"]

// 制作镜像:

# docker build -t foo:latest ./

启动两个容器:

# docker run --name c1 -d --cap-add=NET_ADMIN foo:latest
7a01a19d9328b39f094c9a9c76340d179baaf93afb52189816bcc79f8319cb64
# docker run --name c2 -d --cap-add=NET_ADMIN foo:latest
94a2f1841f6d95fd0682299b17c0aedb60c1047786c8e75b0f1ab7316a995409

容器启动后的网络信息汇总如下:

# ifconfig -a
docker0   Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 02:42:ff:27:17:4d
          inet addr:192.168.0.1  Bcast:0.0.0.0  Mask:255.255.240.0
          ... ...

eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:16:3e:06:3a:3a
          inet addr:10.171.77.0  Bcast:10.171.79.255  Mask:255.255.248.0
          ... ...

lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
          inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
          ... ...

veth0594f4b Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 96:5b:d4:80:73:5f
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          ... ...

veth57a3dec Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 02:52:e9:60:ea:b1
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          ... ...

为了方便大家理解,这里附上一幅简易的容器网络拓扑:

img{512x368}

二、调试工具配置

Docker单机容器网络默认使用的是桥接网络,所有启动的容器均桥接在Docker引擎创建的docker0 linux bridge上,因此内核对Linux bridge的处理逻辑是理解Docker容器网络的关键。

与硬件网桥/交换机不同的是,Linux Bridge还具备三层网络,即IP层的功能,也就是docker0既是一个网桥也是一个具备三层转发功能的网卡设备。传统意义上,按照iso网络七层规范,iptables工作在三层,而网桥是一个二层(数据链路层)设备,但Linux协议栈针对网桥设备的实现却在网络层的规则链(ebtables)中串接了iptables的规则链处理,即在二层也可以处理ip包,这是为了实现桥接透明防火墙的需要。但实现也会保证每个packet数据包仅会走一次iptable的某个chain,要么在linker layer走,要么在network layer走,不会出现在linker layer走一次,又在network layer重复走一次的情况。关于这种基于linux bridge的ebtables和iptables的交互规则,在netfilter官网的一篇名为《ebtables/iptables interaction on a Linux-based bridge》文档中有详细说明,这篇文章也是后续分析的一个重要参考。下面这幅图也是文章中提到的那幅netfilter数据流全图,后续在分析时会反复回到这幅图(后续简称为:全图):

img{512x368}
建议:右键在新标签中打开图片看大图

关于数据包在iptables的各条chain的流经图可以参见下面:

img{512x368}

1、iptables TRACE target的设置

在本次实验中,我们主要需要查看数据包的流转路径,因此我们需要针对iptables的data flow进行跟踪。之前,我曾使用过iptables提供的LOG target或mark set&match方式来跟踪iptables中的数据流,但这两种方式都不理想,需要针对特定流程插入LOG target或match在入口包设定好的mark,对iptables规则的侵入较大,调试和观察也较为复杂;iptables自身提供了TRACE功能,一旦设定,当数据包匹配到任意chain上任意table的处理规则时,iptables会在系统日志(/var/log/syslog)中自动输出此时的数据包状态日志。

我们来为iptables规则添加TRACE,TRACE target只能在iptables的raw表中添加,raw表中有两条iptables built-in chain: PREROUTING和OUTPUT,分别代表网卡数据入口和本地进程下推数据的出口。TRACE target就添加在这两条chain上,步骤如下:

# iptables -t raw -A OUTPUT -p icmp -j TRACE
# iptables -t raw -A PREROUTING -p icmp -j TRACE

注意:我们采用icmp协议(ping协议)进行测试,因此我们只TRACE icmp协议的请求和应答包。

2、ebtables的调试设置

我们的重点在iptables,为ebtables只是辅助,帮助我们看清数据包到底是在哪一层被hook进iptables的规则链中进行处理的。因此我们在全图中的每个ebtables的built-in chain上都加上LOG(ebtables目前还不支持TRACE):

# ebtables -t broute -A BROUTING -p ipv4 --ip-proto 1 --log-level 6 --log-ip --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:broute:BROUTING" -j ACCEPT
# ebtables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p ipv4 --ip-proto 1 --log-level 6 --log-ip --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:nat:OUTPUT"  -j ACCEPT
# ebtables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p ipv4 --ip-proto 1 --log-level 6 --log-ip --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:nat:PREROUTING" -j ACCEPT
# ebtables -t filter -A INPUT -p ipv4 --ip-proto 1 --log-level 6 --log-ip --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:filter:INPUT" -j ACCEPT
# ebtables -t filter -A FORWARD -p ipv4 --ip-proto 1 --log-level 6 --log-ip --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:filter:FORWARD" -j ACCEPT
# ebtables -t filter -A OUTPUT -p ipv4 --ip-proto 1 --log-level 6 --log-ip --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:filter:OUTPUT" -j ACCEPT
# ebtables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p ipv4 --ip-proto 1 --log-level 6 --log-ip --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:nat:POSTROUTING" -j ACCEPT

注意:这里--ip-proto 1 表示仅match icmp packet。

3、iptables和ebtables规则全文

启动两个容器并添加上述规则后,当前的的iptables规则如下:(通过iptables-save输出的按table组织的rules)

# iptables-save
# Generated by iptables-save v1.6.0 on Sun Nov  5 14:50:46 2017
*raw

: PREROUTING ACCEPT [1564539:108837380]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [1504962:130805835]
-A PREROUTING -p icmp -j TRACE
-A OUTPUT -p icmp -j TRACE
COMMIT
# Completed on Sun Nov  5 14:50:46 2017
# Generated by iptables-save v1.6.0 on Sun Nov  5 14:50:46 2017
*filter
:INPUT ACCEPT [1564535:108837044]
:FORWARD DROP [0:0]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [1504968:130806627]

: DOCKER - [0:0]

: DOCKER-ISOLATION - [0:0]

: DOCKER-USER - [0:0]

-A FORWARD -j DOCKER-USER
-A FORWARD -j DOCKER-ISOLATION
-A FORWARD -o docker0 -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -o docker0 -j DOCKER
-A FORWARD -i docker0 ! -o docker0 -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -i docker0 -o docker0 -j ACCEPT
-A DOCKER-ISOLATION -j RETURN
-A DOCKER-USER -j RETURN
COMMIT
# Completed on Sun Nov  5 14:50:46 2017
# Generated by iptables-save v1.6.0 on Sun Nov  5 14:50:46 2017
*nat

: PREROUTING ACCEPT [280:14819]
:INPUT ACCEPT [278:14651]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [639340:38370263]

: POSTROUTING ACCEPT [639342:38370431]

: DOCKER - [0:0]

-A PREROUTING -m addrtype --dst-type LOCAL -j DOCKER
-A OUTPUT ! -d 127.0.0.0/8 -m addrtype --dst-type LOCAL -j DOCKER
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.0.0/20 ! -o docker0 -j MASQUERADE
-A DOCKER -i docker0 -j RETURN
COMMIT
# Completed on Sun Nov  5 14:50:46 2017

而ebtables的规则如下:

# ebtables-save
# Generated by ebtables-save v1.0 on Sun Nov  5 16:51:50 CST 2017
*nat
: PREROUTING ACCEPT
:OUTPUT ACCEPT
: POSTROUTING ACCEPT
-A PREROUTING -p IPv4 --ip-proto icmp --log-level info --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:nat:PREROUTING" --log-ip -j ACCEPT
-A OUTPUT -p IPv4 --ip-proto icmp --log-level info --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:nat:OUTPUT" --log-ip -j ACCEPT
-A POSTROUTING -p IPv4 --ip-proto icmp --log-level info --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:nat:POSTROUTING" --log-ip -j ACCEPT

*broute
:BROUTING ACCEPT
-A BROUTING -p IPv4 --ip-proto icmp --log-level info --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:broute:BROUTING" --log-ip -j ACCEPT

*filter
:INPUT ACCEPT
:FORWARD ACCEPT
:OUTPUT ACCEPT
-A INPUT -p IPv4 --ip-proto icmp --log-level info --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:filter:INPUT" --log-ip -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -p IPv4 --ip-proto icmp --log-level info --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:filter:FORWARD" --log-ip -j ACCEPT
-A OUTPUT -p IPv4 --ip-proto icmp --log-level info --log-prefix "TRACE: eb:filter:OUTPUT" --log-ip -j ACCEPT

对于iptables,我们还可以通过iptables命令输出另外一种组织形式的规则列表,我们这里列出filter和nat这两个重要的table的规则(输出规则number,便于后续match分析时查看):

# iptables -nL --line-numbers -v -t filter
Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 2558K packets, 178M bytes)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination

Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
1       10   840 DOCKER-USER  all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0
2       10   840 DOCKER-ISOLATION  all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0
3        7   588 ACCEPT     all  --  *      docker0  0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0            ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED
4        3   252 DOCKER     all  --  *      docker0  0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0
5        0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  docker0 !docker0  0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0
6        3   252 ACCEPT     all  --  docker0 docker0  0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0

Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 2460K packets, 214M bytes)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination

Chain DOCKER (1 references)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination

Chain DOCKER-ISOLATION (1 references)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
1       10   840 RETURN     all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0

Chain DOCKER-USER (1 references)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
1       10   840 RETURN     all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0

# iptables -nL --line-numbers -v -t nat
Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT 884 packets, 46522 bytes)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
1      881 46270 DOCKER     all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0            ADDRTYPE match dst-type LOCAL

Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 881 packets, 46270 bytes)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination

Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 1048K packets, 63M bytes)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
1        0     0 DOCKER     all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0           !127.0.0.0/8          ADDRTYPE match dst-type LOCAL

Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 1048K packets, 63M bytes)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
1        0     0 MASQUERADE  all  --  *      !docker0  192.168.0.0/20       0.0.0.0/0

Chain DOCKER (2 references)
num   pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
1        0     0 RETURN     all  --  docker0 *       0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0

三、Container to Container

下面,我们分三种情况来看看容器网络的数据包是如何流动的,首先是Container to Container。

img{512x368}

我们在容器C1中执行ping 3次 C2的命令:

# docker exec c1 ping -c 3 192.168.0.3
PING 192.168.0.3 (192.168.0.3) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.0.3: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.226 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.3: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.159 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.3: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.185 ms

--- 192.168.0.3 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 1998ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.159/0.190/0.226/0.027 ms

在容器c1(192.168.0.2)中,icmp request由ping程序(c1 namespace中的local process)发出。c1 network namespace中的路由表如下:

# docker exec c1 netstat -rn
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags   MSS Window  irtt Iface
0.0.0.0         192.168.0.1     0.0.0.0         UG        0 0          0 eth0
192.168.0.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.240.0   U         0 0          0 eth0

由于目标容器地址为192.168.0.3,在容器c1的直连网络上,走第二条直连路由(非默认路由),数据包通过eth0发出。

由于c1 namespace中的eth0通过veth机制连接在host namespace的docker0 bridge的一个Slave port上,因此上述数据包通过docker0 bridge的slave port: veth0594f4b流入docker0 bridge。

这里再强调一下linux bridge设备。Linux下的Bridge是一种虚拟设备,它依赖于一个或多个从设备。它不是内核虚拟出的和从设备同一层次的镜像设备,而是内核虚拟出的一个高一层次的设备,并把从设备虚拟化为端口port,同时处理各个从设备的数据收发及转发。bridge设备是建立在从设备之上的(这些从设备可以是实际设备,也可以是vlan设备等),并且我们可以为bridge准备一个IP(bridge设备的MAC地址是它所有从设备中最小的MAC地址),这样该主机就可以通过这个bridge设备与网络中的其它主机通信了。另外一旦某个网络设备被“插到”linux bridge上,这个网络设备将会变为bridge的从设备,被虚拟化为端口port,从设备的IP及MAC都不再可用,好似被bridge剥夺了被内核网络栈处理的资格;它们被设置为接收任何包,对其流入的数据包的处理交由bridge完成,并最终由bridge设备来决定数据包的去向:接收到本机、转发或丢弃。

因此,位于host namespace的docker0 bridge从slave port: veth0594f4b收到icmp request后,我们不会看到veth0594f4b这一netdev被内核网络栈程序单独处理(比如:单独走一遍ebtables和iptables chains),而是进入bridge处理逻辑(此时可以回顾一下上面的全图)。由于数据包已经进入到了host namespace,因此我们可以通过ebtables和iptables输出的Trace和log来跟踪数据包流转的路径了:

1、start -> bridgecheck -> linker layer

TRACE: eb:broute:BROUTING IN=veth0594f4b OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.3, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:nat:PREROUTING IN=veth0594f4b OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.3, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1

从最初的trace log来看,在bridge check之后(发现it is a linux bridge),数据包进入到linker layer中;并且在linker layer的BROUTING built-in chain之后,数据包没有被转移到上面的network layer,而是继续linker layer的行程:进入linker layer的nat:PREROUTING中。

2、call iptables chain rules in linker layer

结合全图中的图示和日志输出,在linker layer的nat:PREROUTING之后,linker layer调用了上层iptables的处理规则:raw:PREROUTING和nat:PREROUTING:

TRACE: raw:PREROUTING:policy:2 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: nat:PREROUTING:policy:2 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1

Trace target在数据包match table、chains的policy或rules时会输出日志,日志格式:”TRACE:tablename:chainname:type:rulenum”。当匹配到的是普通rules时,type=”rule”;当碰到一个user-defined chain的return target时,type=”return”;当匹配到built-in chain(比如:PREROUTING、INPUT、OUTPUT、FORWARD和POSTROUTING)的default policy时,type=”policy”。

从上面的日志输出来看,似乎PREROUTING chain的raw table中的Trace target不能被trace自身match,因此trace log输出的是匹配raw table built-in chain: PREROUTING的default policy: ACCEPT,num=2(policy和rules整体排序后的序号);在PREROUTING chain的nat表中匹配时,Trace也仅匹配到了default policy,rule 1(target: Docker)没有匹配上;

这里有一点奇怪的是mangle table没有任何输出,即便是default policy的也没有,原因暂不明。

3、bridge decision

根据全图和后续的日志,我们得到了bridge decision的结果:继续在linker layer上处理数据包,一路向右。不过在处理的路径上依旧调用了iptables的rules:

TRACE: eb:filter:FORWARD IN=veth0594f4b OUT=veth57a3dec MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.3, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-USER:return:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:2 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-ISOLATION:return:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:4 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:DOCKER:return:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:6 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1

bridge decision决定的依据或则规则是什么呢?《ebtables/iptables interaction on a Linux-based bridge》一文给了我们一些答案:

The bridge's decision for a frame can be one of these:

* bridge it, if the destination MAC address is on another side of the bridge;
* flood it over all the forwarding bridge ports, if the position of the box with the destination MAC is unknown to the bridge;
* pass it to the higher protocol code (the IP code), if the destination MAC address is that of the bridge or of one of its ports;
* ignore it, if the destination MAC address is located on the same side of the bridge.

不过即便按照这几条规则,我依然有一定困惑,那就是真实的处理是:依旧在linker layer,但掺杂了上层网络层的处理规则。

另外,你可能会发现iptables log里MAC值的格式很怪异(比如:MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00),非常long。其实这个MAC值是一个组合:Souce MAC, Destination MAC和 frame type的组合。

02:42:c0:a8:00:03: Destination MAC=00:60:dd:45:67:ea
02:42:c0:a8:00:02: Source MAC=00:60:dd:45:4c:92
08:00 : Type=08:00 (ethernet frame carried an IPv4 datagram)

4、eb:nat:POSTROUTING -> nat:POSTROUTING -> egress(qdisc)

最后packet进入linker layer的POSTROUTING built-in chain:

TRACE: eb:nat:POSTROUTING IN= OUT=veth57a3dec MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.3, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: nat:POSTROUTING:policy:2 IN= OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47066 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1

iptables nat:POSTROUTING没有匹配上docker引擎增加的那条target为DOCKER的rule,于是输出了default policy的日志。

进入到egress(qdisc)后,相当于数据包到了bridge上的另一个slave port(veth57a3dec)上,此时数据包必须被送回网络上,于是进入到容器C2的eth0中。离开了host namespace,我们的日志便追踪不到了。

容器c2因为所在的network namespace是独立于host namespace的,因此有自己的iptables规则(如果未设置,均为默认accept),不受host namespace中的iptables的影响。

5、”消失”的iptable的nat:PREROUTING和nat:POSTROUTING

C2容器回复ping response的路径与request甚为相似,这里一次性将全部日志列出:

TRACE: eb:broute:BROUTING IN=veth57a3dec OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.3 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:nat:PREROUTING IN=veth57a3dec OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.3 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: raw:PREROUTING:policy:2 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:02:02:42:c0:a8:00:03:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.3 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=5962 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1

TRACE: eb:filter:FORWARD IN=veth57a3dec OUT=veth0594f4b MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.3 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth57a3dec PHYSOUT=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:02:02:42:c0:a8:00:03:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.3 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=5962 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-USER:return:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth57a3dec PHYSOUT=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:02:02:42:c0:a8:00:03:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.3 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=5962 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:2 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth57a3dec PHYSOUT=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:02:02:42:c0:a8:00:03:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.3 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=5962 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-ISOLATION:return:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth57a3dec PHYSOUT=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:02:02:42:c0:a8:00:03:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.3 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=5962 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:3 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth57a3dec PHYSOUT=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:02:02:42:c0:a8:00:03:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.3 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=5962 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=1

TRACE: eb:nat:POSTROUTING IN= OUT=veth0594f4b MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.3 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1

仔细观察,我们发现虽然与request的路径类似,但依旧有不同:iptable的nat:PREROUTING和nat:POSTROUTING消失了。Why?iptables就是这么设计的。iptables会跟踪connection的state,当一个connection的首个包经过一次后,connection的state由NEW变成了ESTABLISHED;对于ESTABLISHED的connection的后续packets,内核会自动按照该connection的首个包在nat:PREROUTING和nat:POSTROUTING环节的处理方式进行处理,而不再流经这两个链中的nat表逻辑。而ebtables中似乎没有这个逻辑。

后续的ping的第二个、第三个流程也印证了上述设计,这里仅列出ping request packet 2:

TRACE: eb:broute:BROUTING IN=veth0594f4b OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.3, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:nat:PREROUTING IN=veth0594f4b OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.3, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: raw:PREROUTING:policy:2 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47310 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=2
TRACE: eb:filter:FORWARD IN=veth0594f4b OUT=veth57a3dec MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.3, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47310 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=2
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-USER:return:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47310 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=2
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:2 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47310 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=2
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-ISOLATION:return:1 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47310 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=2
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:3 IN=docker0 OUT=docker0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b PHYSOUT=veth57a3dec MAC=02:42:c0:a8:00:03:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=47310 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=90 SEQ=2
TRACE: eb:nat:POSTROUTING IN= OUT=veth57a3dec MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:03 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.3, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1

全部日志内容请参见:docker-bridge-network-demo-iptables-trace-log.txt文件,这里不赘述。

四、Local Process to Container

img{512x368}

很多”疑难”环节在上面的container to container数据流分析时已经做了解惑,因此后续local process to container和container to external流程将不会再细致描述,说明会略微泛泛一些,不那么细致。

我们在host上执行ping C1三次:

# ping -c 3 192.168.0.2
PING 192.168.0.2 (192.168.0.2) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.160 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.105 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.131 ms

--- 192.168.0.2 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2000ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.105/0.132/0.160/0.022 ms

1、local process -> routing decision -> iptables OUTPUT chain

ping request数据包从本地的ping process发出,根据目的地址路由后,选择docker0作为OUT设备:

TRACE: raw:OUTPUT:policy:2 IN= OUT=docker0 SRC=192.168.0.1 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=18692 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: mangle:OUTPUT:policy:1 IN= OUT=docker0 SRC=192.168.0.1 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=18692 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: nat:OUTPUT:policy:2 IN= OUT=docker0 SRC=192.168.0.1 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=18692 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: filter:OUTPUT:policy:1 IN= OUT=docker0 SRC=192.168.0.1 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=18692 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0

奇怪的是这次mangle chain居然有trace log输出:(。

2、进入linker layer:iptables POSTROUTING -> ebtables OUTPUT -> ebtables POSTROUTING

由于是OUT是bridge设备,因此要进入到ebtable中走一遭:

TRACE: mangle:POSTROUTING:policy:1 IN= OUT=docker0 SRC=192.168.0.1 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=18692 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: nat:POSTROUTING:policy:2 IN= OUT=docker0 SRC=192.168.0.1 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=18692 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: eb:nat:OUTPUT IN= OUT=veth57a3dec MAC source = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.1 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:filter:OUTPUT IN= OUT=veth57a3dec MAC source = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.1 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:nat:POSTROUTING IN= OUT=veth57a3dec MAC source = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.1 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:nat:OUTPUT IN= OUT=veth0594f4b MAC source = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.1 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:filter:OUTPUT IN= OUT=veth0594f4b MAC source = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.1 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:nat:POSTROUTING IN= OUT=veth0594f4b MAC source = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.1 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1

icmp的response和container to container类似,入口走的是linker layer(由于是桥设备),在bridge decision后,走到INPUT chain:

TRACE: eb:broute:BROUTING IN=veth0594f4b OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.1, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:nat:PREROUTING IN=veth0594f4b OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.1, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: raw:PREROUTING:policy:2 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.1 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=56535 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1
TRACE: mangle:PREROUTING:policy:1 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.1 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=56535 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1
TRACE: eb:filter:INPUT IN=veth0594f4b OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=192.168.0.1, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: mangle:INPUT:policy:1 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.1 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=56535 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:INPUT:policy:1 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=192.168.0.1 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=56535 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=30245 SEQ=1

以上我们可以与到非桥设备的ping做比对,我们在host上ping 另外一个LAN中的host:

# ping -c 1 10.28.61.30
PING 10.28.61.30 (10.28.61.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.28.61.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=1.09 ms

--- 10.28.61.30 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.093/1.093/1.093/0.000 ms

得到的trace log如下:

icmp request:

TRACE: raw:OUTPUT:policy:2 IN= OUT=eth0 SRC=10.171.77.0 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=4494 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: mangle:OUTPUT:policy:1 IN= OUT=eth0 SRC=10.171.77.0 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=4494 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: nat:OUTPUT:policy:2 IN= OUT=eth0 SRC=10.171.77.0 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=4494 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: filter:OUTPUT:policy:1 IN= OUT=eth0 SRC=10.171.77.0 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=4494 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: mangle:POSTROUTING:policy:1 IN= OUT=eth0 SRC=10.171.77.0 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=4494 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0
TRACE: nat:POSTROUTING:policy:2 IN= OUT=eth0 SRC=10.171.77.0 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=4494 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1 UID=0 GID=0

icmp response:

TRACE: raw:PREROUTING:policy:2 IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=10.171.77.0 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=57 ID=61118 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1
TRACE: mangle:PREROUTING:policy:1 IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=10.171.77.0 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=57 ID=61118 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1
TRACE: mangle:INPUT:policy:1 IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=10.171.77.0 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=57 ID=61118 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:INPUT:policy:1 IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=10.171.77.0 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=57 ID=61118 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=30426 SEQ=1

可以对照着全图看出在request出去时,发现OUT设备不是bridge,直接走network layer的iptables rules,并从xfrm lookup出去,走到egress(qdisc); response回来时,进行bridge check后,发现IN设备eth0不是bridge,因此直接上到network layer,走iptable chain rules到local process。ebtable的log一行也没有输出。

后续的两个icmp request&response大致相同,并且依旧不走nat PREROUTING和nat POSTROUTING,因为不再是NEW connection。

五、Container to External

img{512x368}

我们在c1 容器中ping 外部的一个节点三次:

# docker exec c1 ping -c 3 10.28.61.30
PING 10.28.61.30 (10.28.61.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.28.61.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=1.32 ms
64 bytes from 10.28.61.30: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=1.30 ms
64 bytes from 10.28.61.30: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=1.21 ms

--- 10.28.61.30 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2002ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.219/1.280/1.323/0.060 ms

1、start -> bridgecheck -> linker layer

和Container to Container的开端很类似,在bridge check后,数据流进入linker layer(docker0 is a bridge),并在该层进行iptables PREROUTING rules的处理,直到bridge decision之前:

TRACE: eb:broute:BROUTING IN=veth0594f4b OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=10.28.61.30, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:nat:PREROUTING IN=veth0594f4b OUT= MAC source = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 MAC dest = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=192.168.0.2 IP DST=10.28.61.30, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: raw:PREROUTING:policy:2 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: mangle:PREROUTING:policy:1 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: nat:PREROUTING:policy:2 IN=docker0 OUT= PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1

2、ebtable filter:INPUT -> routing decision -> iptables FORWARD

目的地址为外部host ip,需要三层介入转发,于是数据包经由eb:filter:INPUT向上走到达network layer的routing decision,根据路由表,将包转发到eth0:

TRACE: mangle:FORWARD:policy:1 IN=docker0 OUT=eth0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:1 IN=docker0 OUT=eth0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-USER:return:1 IN=docker0 OUT=eth0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:2 IN=docker0 OUT=eth0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-ISOLATION:return:1 IN=docker0 OUT=eth0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:5 IN=docker0 OUT=eth0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b MAC=02:42:ff:27:17:4d:02:42:c0:a8:00:02:08:00 SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1

3、iptables nat:POSTROUTING match rule 1

由于要流出到主机外,因此在最后iptables nat:POSTROUTING中,数据包匹配到rule 1,即做MASQUERADE,将数据包源地址更换为host ip:10.171.77.0。

TRACE: mangle:POSTROUTING:policy:1 IN= OUT=eth0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: nat:POSTROUTING:rule:1 IN= OUT=eth0 PHYSIN=veth0594f4b SRC=192.168.0.2 DST=10.28.61.30 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=57351 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1

4、iptables prerouting、forward、postrouting -> ebtabls output、postrouting

返回的应答由于IN设备为eth0,因此直接上到network layer进行iptable chain的处理。在路由后,OUT设备为docker0(bridge设备),因此在最后的环节需要下降到linker layer做output和postrouting处理:

TRACE: raw:PREROUTING:policy:2 IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=10.171.77.0 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=57 ID=58706 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: mangle:PREROUTING:policy:1 IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=10.171.77.0 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=57 ID=58706 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: mangle:FORWARD:policy:1 IN=eth0 OUT=docker0 MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=56 ID=58706 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:1 IN=eth0 OUT=docker0 MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=56 ID=58706 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-USER:return:1 IN=eth0 OUT=docker0 MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=56 ID=58706 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:2 IN=eth0 OUT=docker0 MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=56 ID=58706 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:DOCKER-ISOLATION:return:1 IN=eth0 OUT=docker0 MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=56 ID=58706 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: filter:FORWARD:rule:3 IN=eth0 OUT=docker0 MAC=00:16:3e:06:3a:3a:00:2a:6a:aa:12:7c:08:00 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=56 ID=58706 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: mangle:POSTROUTING:policy:1 IN= OUT=docker0 SRC=10.28.61.30 DST=192.168.0.2 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=56 ID=58706 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0 CODE=0 ID=94 SEQ=1
TRACE: eb:nat:OUTPUT IN= OUT=veth0594f4b MAC source = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=10.28.61.30 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:filter:OUTPUT IN= OUT=veth0594f4b MAC source = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=10.28.61.30 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1
TRACE: eb:nat:POSTROUTING IN= OUT=veth0594f4b MAC source = 02:42:ff:27:17:4d MAC dest = 02:42:c0:a8:00:02 proto = 0x0800 IP SRC=10.28.61.30 IP DST=192.168.0.2, IP tos=0x00, IP proto=1

后续的请求和应答基本类似,少的还是nat PREROUTING和nat POSTROUTING,因为不再是NEW connection。

六、小结

个人赶脚:iptables的规则还是太复杂了,再加上bridge的ebtable规则,让人有些眼花缭乱。尤其是kube-proxy的规则又与docker的规则鞣合在一起,iptables的rules列表就显得更为冗长和复杂了。但目前kube-proxy稳定版依然以iptables为主要实现机制,不过kube-proxy对ipvs的支持也已经在路上了(kubernetes 1.8中ipvs处于alpha阶段),希望后续我们能有更多的选择。

此次实验全部日志内容参见:docker-bridge-network-demo-iptables-trace-log.txt文件

七、参考资料


微博:@tonybai_cn
微信公众号:iamtonybai
github.com: https://github.com/bigwhite

如发现本站页面被黑,比如:挂载广告、挖矿等恶意代码,请朋友们及时联系我。十分感谢! Go语言第一课 Go语言精进之路1 Go语言精进之路2 商务合作请联系bigwhite.cn AT aliyun.com

欢迎使用邮件订阅我的博客

输入邮箱订阅本站,只要有新文章发布,就会第一时间发送邮件通知你哦!

这里是 Tony Bai的个人Blog,欢迎访问、订阅和留言! 订阅Feed请点击上面图片

如果您觉得这里的文章对您有帮助,请扫描上方二维码进行捐赠 ,加油后的Tony Bai将会为您呈现更多精彩的文章,谢谢!

如果您希望通过微信捐赠,请用微信客户端扫描下方赞赏码:

如果您希望通过比特币或以太币捐赠,可以扫描下方二维码:

比特币:

以太币:

如果您喜欢通过微信浏览本站内容,可以扫描下方二维码,订阅本站官方微信订阅号“iamtonybai”;点击二维码,可直达本人官方微博主页^_^:
本站Powered by Digital Ocean VPS。
选择Digital Ocean VPS主机,即可获得10美元现金充值,可 免费使用两个月哟! 著名主机提供商Linode 10$优惠码:linode10,在 这里注册即可免费获 得。阿里云推荐码: 1WFZ0V立享9折!


View Tony Bai's profile on LinkedIn
DigitalOcean Referral Badge

文章

评论

  • 正在加载...

分类

标签

归档



View My Stats