I have several machines in a backend pool associated with an internal load balancer. However, they currently do not have outbound access. The documentation seems to indicate that I should be able to create a public load balancer and attach the same backend pool with it so that I can have outbound access from those machines. However, when I create a public load balancer, I don't have the option of associating it with an existing pool, and when I try to create a new backend pool for the public LB I can't associate those machines with it. Neither machine has a public IP address. From the dashboard it shows:
where all the interesting info is cut off. What am I missing?
Even VM's in the backend pool of an ILB should have a default outbound IP. If you don't have outbound access have you checked the security group rules to make sure outbound traffic is allowed?
I'm afraid you can't do this on the same LB for both inbound & outbound traffic.
If you happen to use the Basic SKU, VMs behind the LB have internet
access as outbound connections are NAT'ed by Azure. But, all VMs have to be in the same AZ. This wasn't a great idea & we declined it
If you use a Standard SKU, outbound connections to the internet are not possible. We learned this after many failed & painful attempts. More details here
As discussed in the above link, attaching a public IP to each VM nic isn't a good idea either
What worked for us is to create another LoadBalancer specifically for outbound connections, attach public IP to that LB & configure outbound rules. More details here
Related
In the documentation for Azure ContainerApps Ports and IP Addresses section it indicates that the
Outbound public IP
Used as the "from" IP for outbound connections that leave the virtual network. These
connections aren't routed down a VPN. Using a NAT gateway or other proxy for outbound
traffic from a Container App environment isn't supported. Outbound IPs aren't guaranteed
and may change over time.
The inbound IP for a ContainerApps Environment is fixed. Azure Container Instances (not ContainerApps) on the other hand seem to have documented capability to configure a static outbound IP via NAT Gateway.
Is there a way to configure a static outbound IP for Azure ContainerApps as well?
If not, which alternate deployment models for a long-running background service are recommended? The requirement is that an external service can count on a fixed outbound IP (or very small range, not the entire DataCenter IP ranges) for whitelisting.
** EDIT - It seems that NAT on VNet is not yet supported on ACA - https://github.com/microsoft/azure-container-apps/issues/522
way to configure a static outbound IP for Azure ContainerApps as well?
No, we can't configure outbound public IP via container apps; that information is there in the official documentation documentation itself.
try this out, Create outbound application rule on the firewall
using below command
az network firewall application-rule create
It will create an outbound rule on the firewall. This rule allows access from the subnet to Azure Container Instances.
HTTP access to the site will configure through egress IP address from Azure Container Instances.
i have found one blog refer this
Please can someone advise how to restrict access on port 80/443 to some Azure VMs, so that they can only be access via the public IP Address that is associated to an Azure Load Balancer.
Our current setup has load balancing rules passing through traffic from public IP on 80=>80 and 443=>443, to back end pool of 2 VMs. We have health probe setup on port 80. Session persistence is set to client IP and floating IP is disabled.
I thought the answer was to deny access (via Network Security Group) to internet (service tag) on 80/443. Then add rule to allow service tag (AzureLoadBalancer) on the same ports. But that didnt seem to have an effect. Having read up a little more on this, it seems the AzureLoadBalancer tag is only to allow the health probe access and not specifically inbound traffic from that load balancer.
I have also tried adding rules to allow the public IP address of the load balancer, but again no effect.
I was wondering if I need to start looking into Azure Firewalls? and somehow restrict access
to inbound traffic that comes through that?
The only way I can get the VMs to respond on those ports is to add rules to allowing 80/443 from any to any....
After reading your question, my understanding is that you have a Public load balancer and the backend VMs also have instance level Public IPs associated with them and hence direct inbound access to the VMs is possible. But you would like to make sure that the direct inbound access to VMs is restricted only via the load balancer.
The simple solution for you to achieve this is by disassociating the instance level public IP of the VMs, this will make the LB public IP as the only point of contact for your VMs.
Keep in mind that the LB is not a proxy, it is just a layer 4 resource to forward traffic, therefore, your backend VM will still see source IP of the clients and not the LB IP, hence, you will still need to allow the traffic at the NSGs level using as source "Any".
However, if your requirement is to enable outbound connectivity from Azure VMs while avoiding SNAT exhaustion, I would advise you to create NAT Gateway, where you can assign multiple Public IP address for SNAT and remove the Public IP from the VM. This setup will make sure that the inbound access is provided by the Public load balancer only and the outbound access is provided by the NAT gateway as shown below:
Refer : https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-network/nat-gateway/nat-gateway-resource#nat-and-vm-with-standard-public-load-balancer
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-network/nat-gateway/tutorial-nat-gateway-load-balancer-public-portal
You could also configure port forwarding in Azure Load Balancer for the RDP/SSH connections to individual instances.
Refer : https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/load-balancer/manage#-add-an-inbound-nat-rule
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/load-balancer/tutorial-load-balancer-port-forwarding-portal
Could you help me with understanding the pricing for loadbalancer in Azure. Here what I've found in manual https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/load-balancer/
Am I right, if I add several Frontend IP configurations, Backend pools and Inbound NAT rules only, without any Load balancing rules I'll be charged only for the amount of data processed? The reason I am asking is that I can't find what is "outbound rules" there is no such item in the settings.
And,in general, my aim is just to redirect ports from public IP to VM.
Yes, you are right. If you are creating only Inbound NAT rules, you will be charged only for the amount of data processed and the charge of the Public IP address resource which is attached to the LB.
Outbound rules are not visible in Portal. You can configure it via CLI or PowerShell. It is used in scenarios where you have VMs without Public IP which are part of Internal Load balancers and need to talk to Internet.
I am little but puzzled by Azure Network Analytics! Can someone help resolving this mystery?
My Kubernetes cluster in Azure is private. It's joined to a vNET and there is no public ip exposed anywhere. Service is configured with internal load balancer. Application gateway calls the internal load balancer. NSG blocks all inbound traffics from internet to app gateway. Only trusted NAT ips are allowed at the NSG.
Question is- I am seeing lot of internet traffic coming to aks on the vNET. They are denied of course! I don't have this public ip 40.117.133.149 anywhere in the subscription. So, how are these requests coming to aks?
You can try calling app gateway from internet and you would not get any response! http://23.100.30.223/api/customer/FindAllCountryProvinceCities?country=United%20States&state=Washington
You would get successful response if you call the Azure Function- https://afa-aspnet4you.azurewebsites.net/api/aks/api/customer/FindAllCountryProvinceCities?country=United%20States&state=Washington
Its possible because of following nsg rules!
Thank you for taking time to answer my query.
In response to #CharlesXu, I am sharing little more on the aks networking. Aks network is made of few address spaces-
Also, there is no public ip assigned to any of the two nodes in the cluster. Only private ip is assigned to vm node. Here is an example of node-0-
I don't understand why I am seeing inbound requests to 40.117.133.149 within my cluster!
After searching all the settings and activity logs, I finally found answer to the mystery IP! A load balancer with external ip was auto created as part of nginx ingress service when I restarted the VMs. NSG was updated automatically to allow internet traffic to port 80/443. I manually deleted the public load balancer along with IP but the bad actors were still calling the IP with a different ports which are denied by default inbound nsg rule.
To reproduce, I removed the public load balancer again along with public ip. Azure aks recreated once I restarted the VMs in the cluster! It's like cat and mouse game!
I think we can update the ingress service annotation to specify service.beta.kubernetes.io/azure-load-balancer-internal: "true". Don't know why Microsoft decided to auto provision public load balancer in the cluster. It's a risk and Microsoft should correct the behavior by creating internal load balancer.
I've got a networking question for one of my customers servers in the cloud.
We are using just a standard 2012R2 VM with a few endpoints set up through the NSG Firewall, and we have a LoadBalancer infront of the network with a few ports forwarded to the same VPC.
The reason we are using a load balancer with port forwarding is because I'm finding countless records of bots trying to hit 3389 and 21 with attempts to break in.
So I have tried to change the source setting in the NSG rule to AzureLoadBalancer with the hope that it will only allow access to traffic that has come via the LoadBalancer on the external ports.
But for some reason this is not the case?
Is there a proper procedure for restricting traffic to a VM via the NSG from a LoadBalancer?
Any help with this is greatly appreciated.
Thanks
The NSG can’t be associated with Load balancer, NSGs can be associated with either subnets or individual VM instances within that subnet, so we can’t use NSG to block inbound IP address from the internet.
To protect the VM (with a public IP), we can deploy Linux VM, use IP tables work as a firewall. Also you can search some third party firewall product in Azure Marketplace.
Update:
To protect your VM, you can use NSG to allow the source IP address range to access your VM. NSG->Add inbound security rule->advanced->source IP address range.
Looking a the LB troubleshooting doc:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/load-balancer/load-balancer-troubleshoot
You have:
-Also, check if a Deny All network security groups rule on the NIC of the VM or the subnet that has a higher priority than the default rule that allows LB probes & traffic (network security groups must allow Load Balancer IP of 168.63.129.16).
If you create your NSG rule and only allow from 168.63.129.16 you should be set. The Azure load balancer will always come from that address no matter what your frontend IP is.