BIG-IP Next does not work on KubeVirt
Hi all, I use a KubeVirt based Hypervisor called Harvester (https://harvesterhci.io) and tried to start a BIG-IP Next Instance with the BIG-IP-Next-20.3.0-2.716.2+0.0.50.qcow2.tar.gz image. The VM does start but I cannot see any service on tcp port 5443 running after doing setup. What I have seen when I checked the logs of the f5-platform-manager deployment is the following: 2025-02-06T12:52:25.985842479Z stdout F "ts"="2025-02-06 12:52:25.985"|"l"="info"|"m"="Found an unknown Bios vendor"|"id"="19093-000230"|"lt"="A"|"vendor"="KubeVirt"|"pod"="f5-platform-manager-6f78695744-p48tr"|"ct"="f5-platform-manager"|"v"="1.0"|"src"="surveyor/z100_detector.go:60" 2025-02-06T12:52:25.98585795Z stdout F "ts"="2025-02-06 12:52:25.985"|"l"="error"|"m"="Failed to run surveyor probe"|"id"="19093-000259"|"lt"="A"|"error"="Unsupported virtual platform: '{ChassisAssetTag: MachineId: Mfr:KubeVirt Product:None Serial: Uuid:aeada22c-3bf3-5220-a678-91f04ac6db0d Version:pc-q35-7.1}'"|"pod"="f5-platform-manager-6f78695744-p48tr"|"ct"="f5-platform-manager"|"v"="1.0"|"src"="surveyor/surveyor.go:344" So what can I do to get this BIG-IP Next Instance running on the VM? Thanks, Peter
F5 Next - how to reference irule procedures
Hi, Anyone figured how references works for irule objects with the call command? and if it is possible do i need to assign it to the vs? This is my stack: I manage to use the call command to a proc within the samle irule but i haven't found a way how to reference proclibrary (irule) from my_irule https://clouddocs.f5.com/bigip-next/20-2-0/irules/bigipn_object_naming_irule.html { "_embedded": { "stacks": [ { "_links": { "self": "/applications/a95e7451-d077-4ec3-a9c1-d0f3bea7f615/stacks/e87175a1-34f3-43d2-b52a-7b7466ed8851" }, "clientSide": { "l4ClientSide": "default:service_2:vs", "persistence": { "cookieMethod": { "method": "COOKIE_INSERT_METHOD" }, "template": "COOKIE_TEMPLATE" } }, "enabled": true, "id": "e87175a1-34f3-43d2-b52a-7b7466ed8851", "irules": [ { "description": "default:service_2:proclibrary", "rule": "when RULE_INIT {\nlog local0. \"proclib started\"\n}\nproc responder {} {\n HTTP::respond 200 content {hell from proc}\n}" }, { "description": "default:service_2:my_irule", "rule": "proc test {} {\nHTTP::respond 200 content [virtual name]\n}\nwhen HTTP_REQUEST {\nset vs_name [virtual name]\nlog local0. \"hello there\"\ncall /app/default:service_2/proclibrary::responder\n\n}" } ], "name": "vs", "serverSide": { "l4ServerSide": "default:service_2:vs" }, "stackType": "HttpAdvancedProxy" } ] }, "_links": { "self": "/applications/a95e7451-d077-4ec3-a9c1-d0f3bea7f615/stacks?" }, "count": 1, "total": 1 }
Application observability (Open Telemetry Tracing)
Hello, do you, or your customers, need BIG-IP to deliver OTEL tracing? It won't (AFAIK) be implemented in BIG-IP classic, but I've opened a RFE to ask for implementation of Open Telemetry (distributed) Tracing on BIG-IP Next: RFE: (Bug alias 1621853) [RFE] Implement OTEL traces If you'll need it, don't hesitate to open a support case to link that RFE-ID, that will give it more weight for prioritization.
BigIP Next - Health Monitors / Template
Just getting feet wet on BigIP Next. Q: Where are the heath monitor (node/pool) created and reconfiguration. Do they support versioning? Q: In the Classic LTM, there was a iAPP for VMWARE Horizon. I know iApps are not supported. Appear the template have replace them. I found a default list of template, but that appeared a little light in vendor application. Are there more template like the VMWARE published somewhere else.Big-IP Next 20.2.0-2.375.1+0.0.43 iRule count problem
I have very simple iRule to show the problem: when HTTP_REQUEST { set Client_IP [IP::client_addr] if { ($Client_IP starts_with "x.x.x.x") && ([HTTP::uri] equals "/seed") } { table set -subtable TABLE "key1" "value1" 30 table set -subtable TABLE "key2" "value2" 15 table set -subtable TABLE "key3" "value3" 45 HTTP::respond 200 content "Done" TCP::close return } set key_value "key1" set key_value2 "key2" set key_value3 "key3" set count [table keys -subtable TABLE -count] HTTP::respond 200 content " Remaining timeout / defined timeout for ${key_value} => [table lookup -notouch -subtable TABLE ${key_value}] [table timeout -subtable TABLE -remaining ${key_value}]/[table timeout -subtable TABLE ${key_value}] Remaining timeout / defined timeout for ${key_value2} => [table lookup -notouch -subtable TABLE ${key_value2}] [table timeout -subtable TABLE -remaining ${key_value2}]/[table timeout -subtable TABLE ${key_value2}] Remaining timeout / defined timeout for ${key_value3} => [table lookup -notouch -subtable TABLE ${key_value3}] [table timeout -subtable TABLE -remaining ${key_value3}]/[table timeout -subtable TABLE ${key_value3}] Count TABLE ${count}" } It looks like table -keys -subtable <tablename> -count don't work properly: Remaining timeout / defined timeout for key1 => value1 27/30 Remaining timeout / defined timeout for key2 => value2 12/15 Remaining timeout / defined timeout for key3 => value3 42/45 Count TABLE 0 My expected output would be 3 (as it is not timeouted), not 0. Can someone check if I am correct? Or tell me how I can count not expired entries in table.
NEXT CM - multiple GTM pool updates simultaneously
Using REST today on version 15 against the F5 GTM (DNS), it appears there's no support for updating multiple GTM pools in a single REST call. We're increasingly being asked to drive down the time it takes to facilitate an application's failover time from one datacenter to another. In some cases, I need to somehow disable a pool member from 100+ GTM pools in under a minute and REST can't keep up. In the NEXT model, I'm guessing we'll have to re-declare the whole GTM config to disable a pool member. Can you think of a way of meeting this type of timing need in NEXT CM?
