From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <josef@oderland.se>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C885368C22
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 14:35:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B702C15335
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 14:34:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from office.oderland.com (office.oderland.com [91.201.60.5])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id E9AA315327
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 14:34:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [193.180.18.161] (port=51564 helo=[10.137.0.14])
by office.oderland.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2)
(envelope-from <josef@oderland.se>) id 1mOfk7-009uiH-J6
for pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 14:34:55 +0200
Message-ID: <00e62956-348c-8c71-bca3-ed1c6f3ea7dd@oderland.se>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 14:34:54 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:92.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/92.0
Content-Language: en-US
From: Josef Johansson <josef@oderland.se>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <a8964d56b11abd57afcab5b304ff484216cb9d21.camel@odiso.com>
<7686571e-ebf0-8ad5-8bc3-af484fd2ac88@oderland.se>
In-Reply-To: <7686571e-ebf0-8ad5-8bc3-af484fd2ac88@oderland.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse,
please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - office.oderland.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.proxmox.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - oderland.se
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: office.oderland.com: authenticated_id:
josjoh@oderland.se
X-Authenticated-Sender: office.oderland.com: josjoh@oderland.se
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.113 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
CTE_8BIT_MISMATCH 0.837 Header says 7bits but body disagrees
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
NICE_REPLY_A -1.975 Looks like a legit reply (A)
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
information. [proxmox.com]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] hetzner bug with pve-firewall
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 12:35:26 -0000
Traffic is only broadcasted to MAC B if the ARP-table in the switch
times out.
Which makes this problem a hell to diagnose :-)
On 9/10/21 12:53, Josef Johansson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've stumpled upon this problem a couple of times and it resulted in me
> add ebtables rules. It is a very annoying problem to be fair. In our
> case what happen is
>
> * traffic is sent to MAC A because traffic flows towards IP A
>
> * traffic is broadcasted to MAC B and MAC A
>
> * MAC B responds with RST
>
> * upstream switch learns that IP A is at MAC B
>
>
> We are doing some benchmark testing with it to ensure that performance
> will not regress also, not done with that.
>
>
> Another more lean solution would be do to DROP instead of REJECT, which
> would solve it.
>
>
> I have a patch for the source code regarding only allowing the VMs MAC
> in ebtables for incoming traffic also.
>
>
> On 9/10/21 12:31, alexandre derumier wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> multiple users have reported problems with hetzner in bridged mode this
>> week and pve-firewall
>> https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/proxmox-claiming-mac-address.52601/
>> https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/mac-address-abuse-report.95656/
>>
>> Seem that hetzner have bugs or are under attack, but they are flooding
>> traffic to proxmox nodes with wrong mac/ip destination.
>>
>> The problem is that if users use pve-firewall with reject rules, the
>> RST packet is send with the wrong mac/ip as source,
>>
>> and then hertzner is blocking the server of the users ....
>>
>>
>> I'm looking to see if we could add filtering at ebtables level, to drop
>> wrong mac destination.
>>
>> But they are also another problem, if user use DROP as default action,
>> we have a default REJECT for whois port 53.
>>
>> 'PVEFW-Drop' => [
>> # same as shorewall 'Drop', which is equal to DROP,
>> # but REJECT/DROP some packages to reduce logging,
>> # and ACCEPT critical ICMP types
>> { action => 'PVEFW-reject', proto => 'tcp', dport => '43' }, #
>> REJECT 'auth'
>>
>> Does somebody known why we do a reject here ? could it be change to
>> drop ?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pve-devel mailing list
>> pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
>> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
--
Med vänliga hälsningar
Josef Johansson