Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

QNAP NAS solution for server virtualization and clustering/HA/FT
Post Reply
googleg
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:20 pm

Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

Post by googleg »

Hi all,
I have a TS-251+ on which I need to spin up a container that must be completely isolated from my LAN.

The two NICs of the NAS are connected to two different ports on a switch which are tagged as VLAN1 (for the LAN) and VLAN10 is my DMZ.

I want to be 100% certain that the container cannot reach any hosts on the LAN, including the NAS itself, and vice versa (e.g. cannot ping the container from the NAS console).

If I understood correctly the various opions for creating a virtual switch, what I need is a software-defined virtual switch, attached to my interface on VLAN10 - am I correct?

Thank you for the confirmation.
User avatar
dolbyman
Guru
Posts: 37324
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:11 am
Location: Vancouver BC , Canada

Re: Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

Post by dolbyman »

No, a software defined switch would be to bridge traffic between both ports, but you want to have each port in it's own (V)LAN
googleg
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

Post by googleg »

Thanks for your answer.

I am still struggling to have the complete isolation. If I add VLAN10 on my interface Adapter1, I give it an IP say 10.0.0.14, and I do NOT attach it any virtual switch, I can still ping it from the NAS IP:

sudo ping 10.0.0.14 -I 192.168.1.14
Password:
PING 10.0.0.14 (10.19.10.14) from 192.168.1.14: 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 10.0.0.14: seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.164 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.14: seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.133 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.14: seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.134 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.14: seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.144 ms
^C

That should not be the case.

Obviously I am missing something so any help will be more than welcome :-)
User avatar
dolbyman
Guru
Posts: 37324
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:11 am
Location: Vancouver BC , Canada

Re: Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

Post by dolbyman »

Where is that ping coming from ?
googleg
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

Post by googleg »

From the NAS cli (ssh)...
User avatar
dolbyman
Guru
Posts: 37324
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:11 am
Location: Vancouver BC , Canada

Re: Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

Post by dolbyman »

Check if the NAS added a static route between both networks

Network&Virtual switch > Network/Route
googleg
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

Post by googleg »

I do not have a static route but indeed I have a connected route in my routing table.

I guess this is normal and to achieve through isolation I need to add some firewall rules.
googleg
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

Post by googleg »

...currently looking at network namespaces to achieve this isolation, will report on my findings here.
googleg
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Network isolation for a container: do I need to use a software-defined switch?

Post by googleg »

So afer quite a lot of trial and error I finally came to the conclusion that the network isolation works but the fact that I can ping the interface attached to my DMZ VLAN using the source address of the interface connected to the LAN still seems very odd to me.
Post Reply

Return to “Server Virtualization & Clustering”