Unable to login with Certificate Manager local user
I've created a local user account with the Certificate Manager role on All partitions - and have enabled tmsh access. However, when I attempt to login with this account - either GUI or SSH - I am receiving a login failed message. We don't have any password enforcement in place and access restrictions are tied to the RFC1918 address space, so that is not coming into play. We have remote auth (TACACS) enabled with fallback to local and other local accounts are able to login successfully. Thoughts? Version: 17.1.1.2 Username - cert-mgr Role - Certificate Manager Partition: All Terminal Access: tmsh Wed Sep 11 10:51:20 CDT 2024 cert-mgr 0-0 httpd(pam_audit): User=cert-mgr tty=(unknown) host=x.x.x.x failed to login after 1 attempts (start="Wed Sep 11 10:51:18 2024" end="Wed Sep 11 10:51:20 2024").: Wed Sep 11 11:00:20 CDT 2024 cert-mgr 0-0 httpd(pam_audit): User=cert-mgr tty=(unknown) host=x.x.x.x failed to login after 1 attempts (start="Wed Sep 11 11:00:18 2024" end="Wed Sep 11 11:00:20 2024").:VIPTest: Rapid Application Testing for F5 Environments
VIPTest is a Python-based tool for efficiently testing multiple URLs in F5 environments, allowing quick assessment of application behavior before and after configuration changes. It supports concurrent processing, handles various URL formats, and provides detailed reports on HTTP responses, TLS versions, and connectivity status, making it useful for migrations and routine maintenance.Intermediate iRules: Nested Conditionals
Conditionals are a pretty standard tool in every programmer's toolbox. They are the functions that allow us to decided when we want certain actions to happen, based on, well, conditions that can be determined within our code. This concept is as old as compilers. Chances are, if you're writing code, you're going to be using a slew of these things, even in an Event based language like iRules. iRules is no different than any other programming/scripting language when it comes to conditionals; we have them. Sure how they're implemented and what they look like change from language to language, but most of the same basic tools are there: if, else, switch, elseif, etc. Just about any example that you might run across on DevCentral is going to contain some example of these being put to use. Learning which conditional to use in each situation is an integral part to learning how to code effectively. Once you have that under control, however, there's still plenty more to learn. Now that you're comfortable using a single conditional, what about starting to combine them? There are many times when it makes more sense to use a pair or more of conditionals in place of a single conditional along with logical operators. For example: if { [HTTP::host] eq "bob.com" and [HTTP::uri] starts_with "/uri1" } { pool pool1 } elseif { [HTTP::host] eq "bob.com" and [HTTP::uri] starts_with "/uri2" } { pool pool2 } elseif { [HTTP::host] eq "bob.com" and [HTTP::uri] starts_with "/uri3" } { pool pool3 } Can be re-written to use a pair of conditionals instead, making it far more efficient. To do this, you take the common case shared among the example strings and only perform that comparison once, and only perform the other comparisons if that result returns as desired. This is more easily described as nested conditionals, and it looks like this: if { [HTTP::host] eq "bob.com" } { if {[HTTP::uri] starts_with "/uri1" } { pool pool1 } elseif {[HTTP::uri] starts_with "/uri2" } { pool pool2 } elseif {[HTTP::uri] starts_with "/uri3" } { pool pool3 } } These two examples are logically equivalent, but the latter example is far more efficient. This is because in all the cases where the host is not equal to "bob.com", no other inspection needs to be done, whereas in the first example, you must perform the host check three times, as well as the uri check every single time, regardless of the fact that you could have stopped the process earlier. While basic, this concept is important in general when coding. It becomes exponentially more important, as do almost all optimizations, when talking about programming in iRules. A script being executed on a server firing perhaps once per minute benefits from small optimizations. An iRule being executed somewhere in the order of 100,000 times per second benefits that much more. A slightly more interesting example, perhaps, is performing the same logical nesting while using different operators. In this example we'll look at a series of if/elseif statements that are already using nesting, and take a look at how we might use the switch command to even further optimize things. I've seen multiple examples of people shying away from switch when nesting their logic because it looks odd to them or they're not quite sure how it should be structured. Hopefully this will help clear things up. First, the example using if statements: when HTTP_REQUEST { if { [HTTP::host] eq "secure.domain.com" } { HTTP::header insert "Client-IP:[IP::client_addr]" pool sslServers } elseif { [HTTP::host] eq "www.domain.com" } { HTTP::header insert "Client-IP:[IP::client_addr]" pool httpServers } elseif { [HTTP::host] ends_with "domain.com" and [HTTP::uri] starts_with "/secure"} { HTTP::header insert "Client-IP:[IP::client_addr]" pool sslServers } elseif {[HTTP::host] ends_with "domain.com" and [HTTP::uri] starts_with "/login"} { HTTP::header insert "Client-IP:[IP::client_addr]" pool httpServers } elseif { [HTTP::host] eq "intranet.myhost.com" } { HTTP::header insert "Client-IP:[IP::client_addr]" pool internal } } As you can see, this is completely functional and would do the job just fine. There are definitely some improvements that can be made, though. Let's try using a switch statement instead of several if comparisons for improved performance. To do that, we're going to have to use an if nested inside a switch comparison. While this might be new to some or look a bit odd if you're not used to it, it's completely valid and often times the most efficient you’re going to get. This is what the above code would look like cleaned up and put into a switch: when HTTP_REQUEST { HTTP::header insert "Client-IP:[IP::client_addr]" switch -glob [HTTP::host] { "secure.domain.com" { pool sslServers } "www.domain.com" { pool httpServers } "*.domain.com" { if { [HTTP::uri] starts_with "/secure" } { pool sslServers } else { pool httpServers } } "intranet.myhost.com" { pool internal } } } As you can see this is not only easier to read and maintain, but it will also prove to be more efficient. We've moved to the more efficient switch structure, we've gotten rid of the repeat host comparisons that were happening above with the /secure vs /login uris, and while I was at it I got rid of all those examples of inserting a header, since that was happening in every case anyway. Hopefully the benefit this technique can offer is clear, and these examples did the topic some justice. With any luck, you'll nest those conditionals with confidence now.How to get a F5 BIG-IP VE Developer Lab License
(applies to BIG-IP TMOS Edition) To assist DevOps teams improve their development for the BIG-IP platform, F5 offers a low cost developer lab license.This license can be purchased from your authorized F5 vendor. If you do not have an F5 vendor, you can purchase a lab license online: CDW BIG-IP Virtual Edition Lab License CDW Canada BIG-IP Virtual Edition Lab License Once completed, the order is sent to F5 for fulfillment and your license will be delivered shortly after via e-mail. F5 is investigating ways to improve this process. To download the BIG-IP Virtual Edition, please log into downloads.f5.com (separate login from DevCentral), and navigate to your appropriate virtual edition, example: For VMware Fusion or Workstation or ESX/i:BIGIP-16.1.2-0.0.18.ALL-vmware.ova For Microsoft HyperV:BIGIP-16.1.2-0.0.18.ALL.vhd.zip KVM RHEL/CentoOS: BIGIP-16.1.2-0.0.18.ALL.qcow2.zip Note: There are also 1 Slot versions of the above images where a 2nd boot partition is not needed for in-place upgrades. These images include_1SLOT- to the image name instead of ALL. The below guides will help get you started with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition to develop for VMWare Fusion, AWS, Azure, VMware, or Microsoft Hyper-V. These guides follow standard practices for installing in production environments and performance recommendations change based on lower use/non-critical needs fo Dev/Lab environments. Similar to driving a tank, use your best judgement. DeployingF5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition on VMware Fusion Deploying F5 BIG-IP in Microsoft Azure for Developers Deploying F5 BIG-IP in AWS for Developers Deploying F5 BIG-IP in Windows Server Hyper-V for Developers Deploying F5 BIG-IP in VMware vCloud Director and ESX for Developers Note: F5 Support maintains authoritativeAzure, AWS, Hyper-V, and ESX/vCloud installation documentation. VMware Fusion is not an official F5-supported hypervisor so DevCentral publishes the Fusion guide with the help of our Field Systems Engineering teams.F5 Distributed Cloud Customer Edge on F5 rSeries – Reference Architecture
Traditionally, to advertise an application to the internet or to connect applications across multi-cloud environments enterprises must configure and manage multiple networking and security devices from different vendors in the DMZ of the data center. CE on F5 rSeries is a single vendor, converged solution for all enterprise multi-cloud application connectivity and security needs.
iHealth Upgrade Advisor: Making upgrades a little easier
Whether it is upgrading the firmware on a switch, the OS on a server, an important business application or the software on a BIG-IP, performing upgrades is something that makes almost all IT Admins and Network Engineers nervous. We’ve learned from (sometimes painful) experience that things don’t always go as planned. Good preparation greatly increases the likelihood that an upgrade will be successful, which is why F5 has created the iHealth Upgrade Advisor. Its goal is to provide an additional service from F5 that will complement your existing upgrade preparations, increasing the predictability of the upgrade while reducing your upgrade time. The iHealth Upgrade Advisor service provides a way for users to gain insight into potential issues with a BIG-IP upgrade before they attempt the upgrade. It provides guidance that is specific to a BIG-IP based on its configuration, the version of software it is currently running and the version you are planning to upgrade to. When an issue can be avoided by making a configuration change prior to upgrading, the Upgrade Advisor will tell you exactly what to change. For some issues, it will list the corrective actions to take after the upgrade. Demo Video This short video demonstrating the Upgrade Advisor shows you how to use it and some examples of the guidance it provides. Accessing the Upgrade Advisor The next time you are preparing to upgrade a BIG-IP, login to ihealth.f5.com, upload a .qkview file from that BIG-IP and then view the qkview after iHealth has analyzed it. The Upgrade Advisor can be accessed by clicking on its tab in the left-hand menu. Simply select the version of BIG-IP you are planning to upgrade to in the advisor and review the results. Here is a screenshot of the Upgrade Advisor: Give it a Try Try out the F5 upgrade Advisor today and let us know what you think using the feedback option (circled in red on the right side of the screenshot above).
A Simple One-way Generic MRF Implementation to load balance syslog message
The BIG-IP Generic Message Protocol implements a protocol filter compatible with MRF (Message Routing Framework).MRF is designed to implement the most complex use cases, but it can be daunting if you need to create a simple configuration. This article provides a simple baseline to understand the relationships of the MRF components and how they can be combined for a simple one way implementation . A production implementation will in most case be more complex. The following virtual, profiles and iRules load balances a one way stream of new line delimited messages (in this case syslog) to a pool of message consumers. The messages will be parsed and distributed with a simple MLB protocol. Return traffic will not be returned to the client with this configuration. To implement this we will need these configuration objects: Virtual Server - Accepts incoming traffic and configure the Generic Protocol Generic Protocol - Defines message parsing. Generic Router - Configures message routing and point to the Generic Route Generic Route- Points to a Generic Peer Generic Peer - Defines an LTM pool members and points to the Generic Transport Config Generic Transport Config - Defines the server side protocol and server side irule iRule - Defines the message peers (Connections in the message streams) In this case we have a single client that is sending messages to a virtual server that will then be distributed to 3 pool members. Each message will be sent to one pool member only.This can only be configured from the CLI and the official F5 recommendation is to not make any changes in the web GUI to the virtual server. This was tested with BIG-IP 12.1.3.5 and 14.1.2.6. Here is the virtual with a tcp profile andrequiredprotocol and routing profiles along withan iRule to setup the connection peer on the client side. ltm virtual /Common/mrftest_simple { destination /Common/10.10.20.201:515 ip-protocol tcp mask 255.255.255.255 profiles { /Common/simple_syslog_protocol { } /Common/simple_syslog_router { } /Common/tcp { } } rules { /Common/mrf_simple } source 0.0.0.0/0 source-address-translation { type automap } translate-address enabled translate-port enabled } The first profile is the protocol. The only difference betweenthe default protocol (genericmsg) is the field no-response must be configured to yes if this is a one way stream. Otherwise the server side will allocate buffers for return traffic that will cause severe free memory depletion. ltm message-routing generic protocol simple_syslog_protocol { app-service none defaults-from genericmsg description none disable-parser no max-egress-buffer 32768 max-message-size 32768 message-terminator %0a no-response yes } The Generic Router profilepoints to a generic route ltm message-routing generic router simple_syslog_router { app-service none defaults-from messagerouter description none ignore-client-port no max-pending-bytes 23768 max-pending-messages 64 mirror disabled mirrored-message-sweeper-interval 1000 routes { simple_syslog_route } traffic-group traffic-group-1 use-local-connection yes } The Generic Route pointsto theGeneric Peer: ltm message-routing generic route simple_syslog_route { peers { simple_syslog_peer } } The Generic Peer configures the server pool and points to the Generic Transport Config. Note the pool is configured here instead of the more common configuration in the virtual server. ltm message-routing generic peer simple_syslog_peer { pool mrfpool transport-config simple_syslog_tcp_tc } The Generic Transport Config also has the Generic Protocol configured along with the iRule to setup the server side peers. ltm message-routing generic transport-config simple_syslog_tcp_tc { ip-protocol tcp profiles { simple_syslog_protocol { } tcp { } } rules { mrf_simple } } An iRule must be configured on both the Virtual Server and Generic Transport Config. This iRule must be linked as a profile in both the virtual server and generic transport configuration. ltm rule /Common/mrf_simple { when CLIENT_ACCEPTED { GENERICMESSAGE::peer name "[IP::local_addr]:[TCP::local_port]_[IP::remote_addr]:[TCP::remote_port]" } when SERVER_CONNECTED { GENERICMESSAGE::peer name "[IP::local_addr]:[TCP::local_port]_[IP::remote_addr]:[TCP::remote_port]" } } This example is from a user case where a single syslog client was load balanced to multiple syslog server pool members. Messages are parsed with the newline (0x0a) character as configured in the generic protocol, but this can easily be adapted to other message types.Big IP FQDN Pool Member Resolution from /etc/hosts
Hi, I've added entries to the Big IP /etc/hosts file to map custom FQDNs to IP addresses (in an attempt to workaround the restriction of having LTM nodes with the same address). I then created an LTM Pool with a member using the custom FQDN hoping it would resolve to the IP address in the /etc/hosts file but unfortunately this is failing. The pool member is displaying the error "Unavailable (Enabled) - No records returned". Seems like the pool is only able to auto-populate via direct DNS queries. Is there any way to configure the Big IP to consult the /etc/hosts file first? Thanks
Problem with big packets using http2
Hi workmates, an application that passes through my F5 BIG-IP, requires for large post request, increasing the maximum header size from the default of 32k to 65k, and everything works perfectly, but only if I use http1.1.If i also enable the http2 profile, the packets are dropped by F5. Do you know if it is possible to use packets bigger than 32k using http2? My F5 version is this BIG-IP 15.1.6
Host URL rewrite with different hostname and static URI
I am new to F5 and been asked to implement reverse proxy function. with following setup xyz.com - outside zxy.com - outside inside map it to xyz.com -> change to abc.com/site1/login zxy.com -> change to abc.com/site2/login user browser shows xyz.com/login need assistance to achieve the result
