At LPC this week and just now getting a chance to process the data you sent.
On 9/9/19 8:46 AM, Gowen wrote: > the production traffic is all in the 10.0.0.0/8 network (eth1 global VRF) > except for a few subnets (DNS) which are routed out eth0 (mgmt-vrf) > > > Admin@NETM06:~$ ip route show > default via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 > 10.0.0.0/8 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth1 > 10.24.12.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.24.12.9 > 10.24.65.0/24 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 > 10.25.65.0/24 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 > 10.26.0.0/21 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 > 10.26.64.0/21 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 interesting route table. This is default VRF but you have route leaking through eth0 which is in mgmt-vrf. > > > Admin@NETM06:~$ ip route show vrf mgmt-vrf > default via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 > unreachable default metric 4278198272 > 10.24.12.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.24.12.10 > 10.24.65.0/24 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 > 10.25.65.0/24 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 > 10.26.0.0/21 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 > 10.26.64.0/21 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0 The DNS servers are 10.24.65.203 or 10.24.64.203 which you want to go out mgmt-vrf. correct? 10.24.65.203 should hit the route "10.24.65.0/24 via 10.24.12.1 dev eth0" for both default VRF and mgmt-vrf. 10.24.64.203 will NOT hit a route leak entry so traverse the VRF associated with the context of the command (mgmt-vrf or default). Is that intentional? (verify with: `ip ro get 10.24.64.203 fibmatch` and `ip ro get 10.24.64.203 vrf mgmt-vrf fibmatch`) > > > > The strange activity occurs when I enter the command “sudo apt update” as I > can resolve the DNS request (10.24.65.203 or 10.24.64.203, verified with > tcpdump) out eth0 but for the actual update traffic there is no activity: > > > sudo tcpdump -i eth0 '(host 10.24.65.203 or host 10.25.65.203) and port 53' -n > <OUTPUT OMITTED FOR BREVITY> > 10:06:05.268735 IP 10.24.12.10.39963 > 10.24.65.203.53: 48798+ [1au] A? > security.ubuntu.com. (48) > <OUTPUT OMITTED FOR BREVITY> > 10:06:05.284403 IP 10.24.65.203.53 > 10.24.12.10.39963: 48798 13/0/1 A > 91.189.91.23, A 91.189.88.24, A 91.189.91.26, A 91.189.88.162, A > 91.189.88.149, A 91.189.91.24, A 91.189.88.173, A 91.189.88.177, A > 91.189.88.31, A 91.189.91.14, A 91.189.88.176, A 91.189.88.175, A > 91.189.88.174 (256) > > > > You can see that the update traffic is returned but is not accepted by the > stack and a RST is sent > > > Admin@NETM06:~$ sudo tcpdump -i eth0 '(not host 168.63.129.16 and port 80)' -n > tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode > listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 262144 bytes > 10:17:12.690658 IP 10.24.12.10.40216 > 91.189.88.175.80: Flags [S], seq > 2279624826, win 64240, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 2029365856 ecr > 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0 > 10:17:12.691929 IP 10.24.12.10.52362 > 91.189.95.83.80: Flags [S], seq > 1465797256, win 64240, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 3833463674 ecr > 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0 > 10:17:12.696270 IP 91.189.88.175.80 > 10.24.12.10.40216: Flags [S.], seq > 968450722, ack 2279624827, win 28960, options [mss 1418,sackOK,TS val > 81957103 ecr 2029365856,nop,wscale 7], length 0 > > > 10:17:12.696301 IP 10.24.12.10.40216 > 91.189.88.175.80: Flags [R], seq > 2279624827, win 0, length 0 > 10:17:12.697884 IP 91.189.95.83.80 > 10.24.12.10.52362: Flags [S.], seq > 4148330738, ack 1465797257, win 28960, options [mss 1418,sackOK,TS val > 2257624414 ecr 3833463674,nop,wscale 8], length 0 > > > 10:17:12.697909 IP 10.24.12.10.52362 > 91.189.95.83.80: Flags [R], seq > 1465797257, win 0, length 0 > > > > > I can emulate the DNS lookup using netcat in the vrf: > > > sudo ip vrf exec mgmt-vrf nc -u 10.24.65.203 53 > `ip vrf exec mgmt-vrf <COMMAND>` means that every IPv4 and IPv6 socket opened by <COMMAND> is automatically bound to mgmt-vrf which causes route lookups to hit the mgmt-vrf table. Just running <COMMAND> (without binding to any vrf) means no socket is bound to anything unless the command does a bind. In that case the routing lookups determine which egress device is used. Now the response comes back, if the ingress interface is a VRF then the socket lookup wants to match on a device. Now, a later response shows this for DNS lookups: isc-worker0000 20261 [000] 2215.013849: fib:fib_table_lookup: table 10 oif 0 iif 0 proto 0 0.0.0.0/0 -> 127.0.0.1/0 tos 0 scope 0 flags 0 ==> dev eth0 gw 10.24.12.1 src 10.24.12.10 err 0 isc-worker0000 20261 [000] 2215.013915: fib:fib_table_lookup: table 10 oif 4 iif 1 proto 17 0.0.0.0/52138 -> 127.0.0.53/53 tos 0 scope 0 flags 4 ==> dev eth0 gw 10.24.12.1 src 10.24.12.10 err 0 isc-worker0000 20261 [000] 2220.014006: fib:fib_table_lookup: table 10 oif 4 iif 1 proto 17 0.0.0.0/52138 -> 127.0.0.53/53 tos 0 scope 0 flags 4 ==> dev eth0 gw 10.24.12.1 src 10.24.12.10 err 0 which suggests your process is passing off the DNS lookup to a local process (isc-worker) and it hits the default route for mgmt-vrf when it is trying to connect to a localhost address. For mgmt-vrf I suggest always adding 127.0.0.1/8 to the mgmt vrf device (and ::1/128 for IPv6 starting with 5.x kernels - I forget the exact kernel version). That might solve your problem; it might not. (BTW: Cumulus uses fib rules for DNS servers to force DNS packets out the mgmt-vrf interface.)
