How to get a F5 BIG-IP VE Developer Lab License
(applies to BIG-IP TMOS Edition) To assist operational teams 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, and you are in either Canada or the US 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, log into my.f5.com (separate login from DevCentral), navigate down to the Downloads card under the Support Resources section of the page. Select BIG-IP from the product group family and then the current version of BIG-IP. You will be presented with a list of options, at the bottom, select the Virtual-Edition option that has the following descriptions: For VMware Fusion or Workstation or ESX/i: Image fileset for VMware ESX/i Server For Microsoft HyperV: Image fileset for Microsoft Hyper-V KVM RHEL/CentoOS: Image file set for KVM Red Hat Enterprise Linux/CentOS 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 for development or lab environments. Similar to driving a tank, use your best judgement. Deploying F5 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 authoritative Azure, 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.Implementing SSL Orchestrator - High Level Considerations
Introduction This article is the beginning of a multi-part series on implementing BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator. It includes high availability and central management with BIG-IQ. Implementing SSL/TLS Decryption is not a trivial task. There are many factors to keep in mind and account for, from the network topology and insertion point, to SSL/TLS keyrings, certificates, ciphersuites and on and on. This article focuses on pre-deployment tasks and preparations for SSL Orchestrator. This article is divided into the following high level sections: Solution Overview Customer Use Case Architecture & Network Topology Please forgive me for using SSL and TLS interchangeably in this article. Software versions used in this article: BIG-IP Version: 14.1.2 SSL Orchestrator Version: 5.5 BIG-IQ Version: 7.0.1 Solution Overview Data transiting between clients (PCs, tablets, phones etc.) and servers is predominantly encrypted with Secure Socket Layer (SSL) and its evolution Transport Layer Security (TLS)(ref. Google Transparency Report). Pervasive encryption means that threats are now predominantly hidden and invisible to security inspection unless traffic is decrypted. The decryption and encryption of data by different devices performing security functions potentially adds overhead and latency. The picture below shows a traditional chaining of security inspection devices such as a filtering web gateway, a data loss prevention (DLP) tool, and intrusion detection system (IDS) and next generation firewall (NGFW). Also, TLS/SSL operations are computationally intensive and stress the security devices’ resources. This leads to a sub-optimal usage of resource where compute time is used to encrypt/decrypt and not inspect. F5’s BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator offers a solution to optimize resource utilization, remove latency, and add resilience to the security inspection infrastructure. F5 SSL Orchestrator ensures encrypted traffic can be decrypted, inspected by security controls, then re-encrypted—delivering enhanced visibility to mitigate threats traversing the network. As a result, you can maximize your security services investment for malware, data loss prevention (DLP), ransomware, and next-generation firewalls (NGFW), thereby preventing inbound and outbound threats, including exploitation, callback, and data exfiltration. The SSL Orchestrator decrypts the traffic and forwards unencrypted traffic to the different security devices for inspection leveraging its optimized and hardware-accelerated SSL/TLS stack. As shown below the BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator classifies traffic and selectively decrypts traffic. It then forwards it to the appropriate security functions for inspection. Finally, once duly inspected the traffic is encrypted and sent on its way to the resource the client is accessing. Deploying F5 and inline security tools together has the following benefits: Traffic Distribution for load sharing Improve the scalability of inline security by distributing the traffic across multiple Security appliances, allowing them to share the load and inspect more traffic. Agile Deployment Add, remove, and/or upgrade Security appliances without disrupting network traffic; converting Security appliances from out-of-band monitoring to inline inspection on the fly without rewiring. Customer Use Case This document focuses on the implementation of BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator to process SSL/TLS encrypted traffic and forward it to a security inspection/enforcement devices. The decryption and forwarding behavior are determined by the security policy. This ensures that only targeted traffic is decrypted in compliance with corporate and regulator policy, data privacy requirements, and other relevant factors. The configuration supports encrypted traffic that originates from within the data center or the corporate network. It also supports traffic originating from clients outside of the security perimeter accessing resources inside the corporate network or demilitarized zone (DMZ) as depicted below. The decrypted traffic transits through different inspection devices for inbound and outbound traffic. As an example, inbound traffic is decrypted and processed by F5’s Advanced Web Application Firewall (F5 Advanced WAF) as shown below. * Can be encrypted or cleartext as needed As an example, outbound traffic is decrypted and sent to a next generation firewall (NGFW) for inspection as shown in the diagram below. The BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator solution offers 5 different configuration templates. The following topologies are discussed in Network Insertion Use Cases. L2 Outbound L2 Inbound L3 Outbound L3 Inbound L3 Explicit Proxy Existing Application In the use case described herein, the BIG-IP is inserted as layer 3 (L3) network device and is configured with an L3 Outbound Topology. Architecture & Network Topology The assumption is that, prior to the insertion of BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator into the network (in a brownfield environment), the network looks like the one depicted below. It is understood that actual networks will vary, that IP addressing, L2 and L3 connectivity will differ, however, this is deemed to be a representative setup. Note: All IP addressing in this document is provided as examples only. Private IP addressing (RFC 1918) is used as in most corporate environments. Note: the management network is not depicted in the picture above. Further discussion about management and visibility is the subject of Centralized Management below. The following is a description of the different reference points shown in the diagram above. a. This is the connection of the border routers that connect to the internet and other WAN and private links. Typically, private IP addressing space is used from the border routers to the firewalls. b. The border switching connects to the corporate/infrastructure firewall. Resilience is built into this switching layer by implementing 2 link aggregates (LAG or Port Channel ®). c. The “demilitarized zone”(DMZ) switches are connected to the firewall. The DMZ network hosts application that are accessible from untrusted networks such as the Internet. d. Application server connect into the DMZ switch fabric. e. Firewalls connect into the switch fabric. Typically core and distribution infrastructure switching will provide L2 and L3 switching to the enterprise (in some case there may be additional L3 routing for larger enterprises/entities that require dynamic routing and other advanced L3 services. f. The connection between the core and distribution layers are represented by a bus on the figure above because the actual connection schema is too intricate to picture. The writer has taken the liberty of drawing a simplified representation. Switches actually interconnect with a mixture of link aggregation and provide differentiated switching using virtualization (e.g. VLAN tagging, 802.1q), and possibly further frame/packet encapsulation (e.g. QinQ, VxLAN). g. The core and distribution switching are used to create 2 broadcast domains. One is the client network, and the other is the internal application network. h. The internal applications are connected to their own subnet. The BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator solution is implemented as depicted below. In the diagram above, new network connections are depicted in orange (vs. blue for existing connections). Similarly to the diagram showing the original network, the switching for the DMZ is depicted using a bus representation to keep the diagram simple. The following discusses the different reference points in the diagram above: a. The BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator is connected to the core switching infrastructure A new VLAN and network are created on the core switching infrastructure to connect to the firewalls (North) to the BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator devices. b. The client network (South) is connected to the BIG-IP via a second VLAN and network. c. The SSL Orchestrator devices are connected to a newly created inspection network. This network is kept separate from the rest of the infrastructure as client traffic transits through the inspection devices unencrypted. As an example, Web Application Firewalls (BIG-IP ASM) are used to filter inbound traffic. d. The LAN configuration for the connection to the BIG-IP ASM is as depicted below. e. The NGFW is connected to the INSPECTION switching network in such a manner that traffic traverses it when the BIG-IP SSL Orchestrator is configured to push traffic for inspection. Summary This article should be a good starting point for planning your initial SSL Orchestrator deployment. We covered the solution overview and use cases. The network topology and architecture was explained with the help of diagrams. Next Steps Click Next to proceed to the next article in the seriesExtend visibility - BIG-IP joins forces with CrowdStrike
Introduction The traditional focus in cybersecurity has prioritized endpoints like laptops and mobiles with EDR, as they are key entry points for intrusions. Modern threats target the full network infrastructure, like routers, ADCs, firewalls, servers, VMs, and cloud instances, as interconnected endpoints. All network software is a potential target in today’s sprawling attack surface. Summarizing some of those blind points below, Servers, including hardware, VMs, and cloud instances: Often under-monitored, rapid spin-up creates ephemeral risks for exfiltration and lateral movement. Network appliances: Enable traffic redirection, data sniffing, or backdoors, if compromised. Application delivery components: Vulnerable to session hijacking, code injection, or DDoS, due to high-traffic processing. Falcon sensor integration In this section, we go through download and installation steps, and observe how the solution works with detecting/blocking malicious packages. For more information, follow our KB articles, https://my.f5.com/manage/s/article/K000157015 Related content K000157015: Getting Started with Falcon sensor for BIG-IP K000156881: Install Falcon sensor for BIG-IP on the BIG-IP system K000157014: F5 Support for Falcon for BIG-IP https://www.f5.com/partners/technology-alliances/crowdstrike
Quick Deployment: Deploy F5 CIS/F5 IngressLink in a Kubernetes cluster on AWS
Summary This article describes how to deploy F5 Container Ingress Services (CIS) and F5 IngressLink with NGINX Ingress Controller on AWS cloud quickly and predictably. All you need to begin with are your AWS credentials. (15-35 mins). Problem Statement Deploying F5 IngressLink is quick and simple. However, to do so, you must first deploy the following resources: AWS resources such as VPC, subnets, security groups and more. A Kubernetes cluster on AWS A BIG-IP Instance F5 Container Ingress Services, CIS NGINX Ingress Controller Application pods Many times, we want to spin up a Kubernetes cluster with the resources listed above for a quick demo, educational purposes, experimental testing or to simply run a command to view its output. However, the creation and deletion processes are both however error prone and time consuming. In addition, we don't want the overhead and cost of maintaining the cluster and keeping the instances/virtual machines running. And we'd like to tear down the deployment as soon as we're done. Solution We need to automate and integrate predictably the creation steps described in F5 Clouddocs: To deploy BIG-IP CIS and F5 IngressLink. NGINX documentation: To deploy NGINX Ingress Controller. Refer to my GitHub repository to perform this using either: Disclaimer: The deployment in the GitHub repository is for demo or experimental purposes and not meant for production use or supported by F5 Support. For example, the Kubernetes nodes are configured to have public elastic IP addresses for easy access for troubleshooting. kops: kops takes about 6-8 mins to deploy a Kubernetes cluster on AWS. You can complete the BIG-IP CIS/Ingress Link deployment in about 15 mins. OR eksctl: eksctl takes about 25-28mins to deploy an EKS cluster on AWS. You can complete the BIG-IP CIS/Ingress Link deployment in about 35mins. If you don't need the Kubernetes resources eksctl creates, such as an EKS cluster managed by Amazon's EKS control plane and at least two subnets in different availability zones for resilience and so on, kops is a faster option. For any bugs, please raise an issue on GitHub.Using n8n To Orchestrate Multiple Agents
I’ve been heads-down building a series of AI step-by-step labs, and this one might be my favorite so far: a practical, cost-savvy “mixture of experts” architectural pattern you can run with n8n and self-hosted models on Ollama. The idea is simple. Not every prompt needs a heavyweight reasoning model. In fact, most don’t. So we put a small, fast model in front to classify the user’s request—coding, reasoning, or something else—and then hand that prompt to the right expert. That way, you keep your spend and latency down, and only bring out the big guns when you really need them. Architecture at a glance: Two hosts: one for your models (Ollama) and one for your n8n app. Keeping these separate helps n8n stay snappy while the model server does the heavy lifting. Docker everywhere, with persistent volumes for both Ollama and n8n so nothing gets lost across restarts. Optional but recommended: NVIDIA GPU on the model host, configured with the NVIDIA Container Toolkit to get the most out of inference. On the model server, we spin up Ollama and pull a small set of targeted models: deepseek-r1:1.5b for the classifier and general chit-chat deepseek-r1:7b for the reasoning agent (this is your “brains-on” model) codellama:latest for coding tasks (Python, JSON, Node.js, iRules, etc.) llama3.2:3b as an alternative generalist On the app server, we run n8n. Inside n8n, the flow starts with the “On Chat Message” trigger. I like to immediately send a test prompt so there’s data available in the node inspector as I build. It makes mapping inputs easier and speeds up debugging. Next up is the Text Classifier node. The trick here is a tight system, prompt and clear categories: Categories: Reasoning and Coding Options: When no clear match → Send to an “Other” branch Optional: You can allow multiple matches if you want the same prompt to hit more than one expert. I’ve tried both approaches. For certain, ambiguous asks, allowing multiple can yield surprisingly strong results. I attach deepseek-r1:1.5b to the classifier. It’s inexpensive and fast, which is exactly what you want for routing. In the System Prompt Template, I tell it: If a prompt explicitly asks for coding help, classify it as Coding If it explicitly asks for reasoning help, classify it as Reasoning Otherwise, pass the original chat input to a Generalist From there, each classifier output connects to its own AI Agent node: Reasoning Agent → deepseek-r1:7b Coding Agent → codellama:latest Generalist Agent (the “Other” branch) → deepseek-r1:1.5b or llama3.2:3b I enable “Retry on Fail” on the classifier and each agent. In my environment (cloud and long-lived connections), a few retries smooth out transient hiccups. It’s not a silver bullet, but it prevents a lot of unnecessary red Xs while you’re iterating. Does this actually save money? If you’re paying per token on hosted models, absolutely. You’re deferring the expensive reasoning calls until a small model decides they’re justified. Even self-hosted, you’ll feel the difference in throughput and latency. CodeLlama crushes most code-related queries without dragging a reasoning model into it. And for general questions—“How do I make this sandwich?”—A small generalist is plenty. A few practical notes from the build: Good inputs help. If you know you’re asking for code, say so. Your classifier and downstream agent will have an easier time. Tuning beats guessing. Spend time on the classifier’s system prompt. Small changes go a long way. Non-determinism is real. You’ll see variance run-to-run. Between retries, better prompts, and a firm “When no clear match” path, you can keep that variance sane. Bigger models, better answers. If you have the budget or hardware, plugging in something like Claude, GPT, or a higher-parameter DeepSeek will lift quality. The routing pattern stays the same. Where to take it next: Wire this to Slack so an engineering channel can drop prompts and get routed answers in place. Add more “experts” (e.g., a data-analysis agent or an internal knowledge agent) and expand your classifier categories. Log token counts/latency per branch so you can actually measure savings and adjust thresholds/models over time. This is a lab, not a production, but the pattern is production-worthy with the right guardrails. Start small, measure, tune, and only scale up the heavy models where you’re seeing real business value. Let me know what you build—especially if you try multi-class routing and send prompts to more than one expert. Some of the combined answers I’ve seen are pretty great. Here's the lab in our git, if you'd like to try it out for yourself. If video is more your thing, try this: Thanks for building along, and I’ll see you in the next lab.
File Uploads and ASM
File Uploads through a WAF Let’s say we have a web application with a form field that permits the upload of arbitrary files. It would appear to the user similar to the below: Aside from photos, the application may permit users to upload Word documents, Excel spreadsheets, PDF’s, and so forth. This can cause many false positives when the web application is protected by ASM, because the uploaded files may: Contain attack signatures. Image files may be parsed as ASCII, and suspicious-looking strings detected; Word or Excel documents may contain XSS tags or SQL injection strings. After all, Mr. ‘Select’ – ‘Union City’ -- is one of our most valuable customers. Contain illegal metacharacters, like XSS tags <> Be so large that the maximum request size (10MB by default) is exceeded Trip other violations It is therefore necessary to inform ASM that a particular parameter on a form field is one that contains a file upload so that checking for attack signatures and metacharacters can be disabled. Why not just disable the signature? Simply, because we do not want to introduce unnecessary exposure into the security policy. Just because a particular signature causes a false positive on the file upload transaction does not mean it should do elsewhere on the web application. At the time of writing, ASM permits attack signatures to be selectively disabled on parameters, but not URLs. Identify the Upload Parameter(s) Use a HTTP inspection tool such as Fiddler, Burp or Developer Tools to determine the name of the upload parameter and URL. In this case, we are uploading a JPG file named DSCF8205.JPG; the parameter used to transfer the file is called ‘filename1’. The URL is /foo.cfm. NOTE: This can also be obtained from the ASM request log; however these do sometimes get truncated making it impossible to determine the parameter name if it occurs more than 5KB into the request. Define the Upload Parameter(s) Assuming the upload is specific to a given URL, create that URL in the ASM policy. Next, create a parameter with the name we discovered earlier, and ensure it is set to type ‘File Upload’. Alternate Configuration Options If file upload is possible in many parts of the site using the same filename, create the parameter globally without defining the URL as we did first here If many file upload parameters are present on a single page with a similar name (e.g. filename1, filename2, filename3…), create a wildcard parameter name filename* ‘Disallow file upload of executables’ is a desirable feature. It checks the magic number of the uploaded file and blocks the upload if it indicates an executable file. As with all ASM configurations, understanding the HTTP fields passed to the application is key The above procedure should work for most cases, and arbitrary file uploads (except executables) should be allowed. However, there are some cases where additional configuration is required. Didn’t Work? Attack signatures have a defined scope, as seen below: Table C.1 Attack signature keywords and usage Keyword Usage content Match in the full content. See Using the content rule option, for syntax information. uricontent Match in the URI, including the query string (unless using theobjonly modifier). See Using the uricontent rule option, for syntax information. headercontent Match in the HTTP headers. See Using the headercontent rule option, for syntax information. valuecontent Matches an alpha-numeric user-input parameter (or an extra-normalized parameter, if using the norm modifier); used for parameter values and XML objects. See Using the valuecontent rule option, for syntax information, and Scope modifiers for the pcre rule option, for more information on scope modifiers. An XML payload is checked for attack signatures when thevaluecontent keyword is used in the signature. Note: The valuecontent parameter replaces the paramcontent parameter that was used in the Application Security Manager versions earlier than 10.0. reference Provides an external link to documentation and other information for the rule. See Using the reference rule option, for syntax information. This information can be found in ASM under “Attack Signatures List”. As an example, search for ‘Path Traversal’ attack types and expand signature id’s 200007006 and 200007000: A signature with a ‘Request’ scope does not pay any attention to parameter extraction – it just performs a bitwise comparison of the signature to the entire request as a big flat hex blob. So to prevent this signature from being triggered, we can (a) disable it, (b) use an iRule to disable it on these specific requests. Before we can use iRules on an ASM policy, we need to switch on the ‘Trigger ASM iRule Events’ setting on the main policy configuration page. Further information can be found at: https://techdocs.f5.com/kb/en-us/products/big-ip_asm/manuals/product/asm-implementations-11-5-0/27.html. The below is an iRule that will prevent a request meeting the following characteristics from raising an ASM violation: Is a POST URI ends with /foo.cfm Content-Type is ‘multipart/form-data’ Attack Signature violation raised with signature ID 200007000 when ASM_REQUEST_VIOLATION { if {([HTTP::method] equals "POST") and ([string tolower [HTTP::path]] ends_with "/foo.cfm") and ([string tolower [HTTP::header "Content-Type"]] contains "multipart/form-data") } { if {([lindex [ASM::violation_data] 0] contains "VIOLATION_ATTACK_SIGNATURE_DETECTED") and ([ASM::violation details] contains "sig_data.sig_id 200007000") } { ASM::unblock } } } What if you’re getting a lot of false positives and just want to disable attack signatures with Request scope? when ASM_REQUEST_VIOLATION { if {([HTTP::method] equals "POST") and ([string tolower [HTTP::path]] ends_with "/foo.cfm") and ([string tolower [HTTP::header "Content-Type"]] contains "multipart/form-data") } { if {([lindex [ASM::violation_data] 0] contains "VIOLATION_ATTACK_SIGNATURE_DETECTED") and ([ASM::violation details] contains "context request") } { ASM::unblock } } } But it’s not an attack signature… False positives might also be generated by large file uploads exceeding the system-defined maximum size. This value is 10MB by default and can be configured. See https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K7935 for more information. However, this is a system-wide variable, and it may not be desirable to change this globally, nor may it be desirable to disable the violation. Again, we can use an iRule to disable this violation on the file upload: when ASM_REQUEST_VIOLATION { if {([HTTP::method] equals "POST") and ([string tolower [HTTP::path]] ends_with "/foo.cfm") and ([string tolower [HTTP::header "Content-Type"]] contains "multipart/form-data") } { if {([lindex [ASM::violation_data] 0] contains "VIOLATION_REQUEST_TOO_LONG") } { ASM::unblock } } } ASM iRules reference https://clouddocs.f5.com/api/irules/ASM__violation_data.html https://clouddocs.f5.com/api/irules/ASM__violation.html https://clouddocs.f5.com/api/icontrol-soap/ASM__ViolationName.htmlF5 Distributed Cloud (XC) Custom Routes: Capabilities, Limitations, and Key Design Considerations
This article explores how Custom Routes work in F5 Distributed Cloud (XC), why they differ architecturally from standard Load Balancer routes, and what to watch out for in real-world deployments, covering backend abstraction, Endpoint/Cluster dependencies, and critical TLS trust and Root CA requirements.Building a Secure Application DMZ with F5 Distributed Cloud and Equinix Network Edge
Why: Establishing a Secure Application DMZ Enterprises increasingly need to deliver their own applications directly to customers across geographies. Relying solely on external providers for Points of Presence (PoPs) can limit control, visibility, and flexibility. A secure Application Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) empowers organizations to: Establish their own PoPs for internet-facing applications. Maintain control over security, compliance, and performance. Deliver applications consistently across regions. Reduce dependency on third-party infrastructure. This approach enables enterprises to build a globally distributed application delivery footprint tailored to their business needs. What: A Unified Solution to Secure Global Application Delivery The joint solution integrates F5 Distributed Cloud (F5XC) Customer Edge (CE) deployed via the Equinix Network Edge Marketplace, with Equinix Fabric to create a strategic point of control for secure, scalable application delivery. Key Capabilities Secure Ingress/Egress: CE devices serve as secure gateways for public-facing applications, integrating WAF, API protection, and DDoS mitigation. Global Reach: Equinix’s infrastructure enables CE deployment in strategic locations worldwide. Multi cloud Networking: Seamless connectivity across public clouds, private data centers, and edge locations. Centralized Management: F5XC Console provides unified visibility, policy enforcement, and automation. Together, these components form a cohesive solution that supports enterprise-grade application delivery with security, performance, and control. How: Architectural Overview Core Components F5XC Customer Edge (CE): Deployed as a virtual network function at Equinix PoPs, CE serves as the secure entry point for applications. F5 Distributed Cloud Console: Centralized control plane for managing CE devices, policies, and analytics. Equinix Network Edge Marketplace: Enables rapid provisioning of CE devices as virtual appliances. Equinix Fabric: High-performance interconnectivity between CE devices, clouds, and data centers. Key Tenets of the Solution Strategic Point of Control - CE becomes the enterprise’s own PoP, enabling secure and scalable delivery of applications. Unified Security Posture - Integrated WAF, API security, and DDoS protection across all CE locations. Consistent Policy Enforcement - Centralized control plane ensures uniform security and compliance policies. Multicloud and Edge Flexibility - Seamless connectivity across AWS, Azure, GCP, private clouds, and data centers. Rapid Deployment - CE provisioning via Equinix Marketplace reduces time-to-market and operational overhead. Partner and Customer Connectivity - Supports business partner exchanges and direct customer access without traditional networking complexity. Additional Links Multicloud chaos ends at the Equinix Edge with F5 Distributed Cloud CE F5 and Equinix Partnership Equinix Fabric Overview Secure Extranet with Equinix Fabric and F5 Distributed Cloud Additional Equinix and F5 partner informationBIG-IP Next Edge Firewall CNF for Edge workloads
Introduction The CNF architecture aligns with cloud-native principles by enabling horizontal scaling, ensuring that applications can expand seamlessly without compromising performance. It preserves the deterministic reliability essential for telecom environments, balancing scalability with the stringent demands of real-time processing. More background information about what value CNF brings to the environment, https://community.f5.com/kb/technicalarticles/from-virtual-to-cloud-native-infrastructure-evolution/342364 Telecom service providers make use of CNFs for performance optimization, Enable efficient and secure processing of N6-LAN traffic at the edge to meet the stringent requirements of 5G networks. Optimize AI-RAN deployments with dynamic scaling and enhanced security, ensuring that AI workloads are processed efficiently and securely at the edge, improving overall network performance. Deploy advanced AI applications at the edge with the confidence of carrier-grade security and traffic management, ensuring real-time processing and analytics for a variety of edge use cases. CNF Firewall Implementation Overview Let’s start with understanding how different CRs are enabled within a CNF implementation this allows CNF to achieve more optimized performance, Capex and Opex. The traditional way of inserting services to the Kubernetes is as below, Moving to a consolidated Dataplane approach saved 60% of the Kubernetes environment’s performance The F5BigFwPolicy Custom Resource (CR) applies industry-standard firewall rules to the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM), ensuring that only connections initiated by trusted clients will be accepted. When a new F5BigFwPolicy CR configuration is applied, the firewall rules are first sent to the Application Firewall Management (AFM) Pod, where they are compiled into Binary Large Objects (BLOBs) to enhance processing performance. Once the firewall BLOB is compiled, it is sent to the TMM Proxy Pod, which begins inspecting and filtering network packets based on the defined rules. Enabling AFM within BIG-IP Controller Let’s explore how we can enable and configure CNF Firewall. Below is an overview of the steps needed to set up the environment up until the CNF CRs installations [Enabling the AFM] Enabling AFM CR within BIG-IP Controller definition global: afm: enabled: true pccd: enabled: true f5-afm: enabled: true cert-orchestrator: enabled: true afm: pccd: enabled: true image: repository: "local.registry.com" [Configuration] Example for Firewall policy settings apiVersion: "k8s.f5net.com/v1" kind: F5BigFwPolicy metadata: name: "cnf-fw-policy" namespace: "cnf-gateway" spec: rule: - name: allow-10-20-http action: "accept" logging: true servicePolicy: "service-policy1" ipProtocol: tcp source: addresses: - "2002::10:20:0:0/96" zones: - "zone1" - "zone2" destination: ports: - "80" zones: - "zone3" - "zone4" - name: allow-10-30-ftp action: "accept" logging: true ipProtocol: tcp source: addresses: - "2002::10:30:0:0/96" zones: - "zone1" - "zone2" destination: ports: - "20" - "21" zones: - "zone3" - "zone4" - name: allow-us-traffic action: "accept" logging: true source: geos: - "US:California" destination: geos: - "MX:Baja California" - "MX:Chihuahua" - name: drop-all action: "drop" logging: true ipProtocol: any source: addresses: - "::0/0" - "0.0.0.0/0" [Logging & Monitoring] CNF firewall settings allow not only local logging but also to use HSL logging to external logging destinations. apiVersion: "k8s.f5net.com/v1" kind: F5BigLogProfile metadata: name: "cnf-log-profile" namespace: "cnf-gateway" spec: name: "cnf-logs" firewall: enabled: true network: publisher: "cnf-hsl-pub" events: aclMatchAccept: true aclMatchDrop: true tcpEvents: true translationFields: true Verifying the CNF firewall settings can be done through the sidecar container kubectl exec -it deploy/f5-tmm -c debug -n cnf-gateway – bash tmctl -d blade fw_rule_stat context_type context_name ------------ ------------------------------------------ virtual cnf-gateway-cnf-fw-policy-SecureContext_vs rule_name micro_rules counter last_hit_time action ------------------------------------ ----------- ------- ------------- ------ allow-10-20-http-firewallpolicyrule 1 2 1638572860 2 allow-10-30-ftp-firewallpolicyrule 1 5 1638573270 2 Conclusion To conclude our article, we showed how CNFs with consolidated data planes help with optimizing CNF deployments. In this article we went through the overview of BIG-IP Next Edge Firewall CNF implementation, sample configuration and monitoring capabilities. More use cases to cover different use cases to be following. Related content F5BigFwPolicy BIG-IP Next Cloud-Native Network Functions (CNFs) CNF HomeIs TCP's Nagle Algorithm Right for Me?
Of all the settings in the TCP profile, the Nagle algorithm may get the most questions. Designed to avoid sending small packets wherever possible, the question of whether it's right for your application rarely has an easy, standard answer. What does Nagle do? Without the Nagle algorithm, in some circumstances TCP might send tiny packets. In the case of BIG-IP®, this would usually happen because the server delivers packets that are small relative to the clientside Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU). If Nagle is disabled, BIG-IP will simply send them, even though waiting for a few milliseconds would allow TCP to aggregate data into larger packets. The result can be pernicious. Every TCP/IP packet has at least 40 bytes of header overhead, and in most cases 52 bytes. If payloads are small enough, most of the your network traffic will be overhead and reduce the effective throughput of your connection. Second, clients with battery limitations really don't appreciate turning on their radios to send and receive packets more frequently than necessary. Lastly, some routers in the field give preferential treatment to smaller packets. If your data has a series of differently-sized packets, and the misfortune to encounter one of these routers, it will experience severe packet reordering, which can trigger unnecessary retransmissions and severely degrade performance. Specified in RFC 896 all the way back in 1984, the Nagle algorithm gets around this problem by holding sub-MTU-sized data until the receiver has acked all outstanding data. In most cases, the next chunk of data is coming up right behind, and the delay is minimal. What are the Drawbacks? The benefits of aggregating data in fewer packets are pretty intuitive. But under certain circumstances, Nagle can cause problems: In a proxy like BIG-IP, rewriting arriving packets in memory into a different, larger, spot in memory taxes the CPU more than simply passing payloads through without modification. If an application is "chatty," with message traffic passing back and forth, the added delay could add up to a lot of time. For example, imagine a network has a 1500 Byte MTU and the application needs a reply from the client after each 2000 Byte message. In the figure at right, the left diagram shows the exchange without Nagle. BIG-IP sends all the data in one shot, and the reply comes in one round trip, allowing it to deliver four messages in four round trips. On the right is the same exchange with Nagle enabled. Nagle withholds the 500 byte packet until the client acks the 1500 byte packet, meaning it takes two round trips to get the reply that allows the application to proceed. Thus sending four messages takes eight round trips. This scenario is a somewhat contrived worst case, but if your application is more like this than not, then Nagle is poor choice. If the client is using delayed acks (RFC 1122), it might not send an acknowledgment until up to 500ms after receipt of the packet. That's time BIG-IP is holding your data, waiting for acknowledgment. This multiplies the effect on chatty applications described above. F5 Has Improved on Nagle The drawbacks described above sound really scary, but I don't want to talk you out of using Nagle at all. The benefits are real, particularly if your application servers deliver data in small pieces and the application isn't very chatty. More importantly, F5® has made a number of enhancements that remove a lot of the pain while keeping the gain: Nagle-aware HTTP Profiles: all TMOS HTTP profiles send a special control message to TCP when they have no more data to send. This tells TCP to send what it has without waiting for more data to fill out a packet. Autonagle: in TMOS v12.0, users can configure Nagle as "autotuned" instead of simply enabling or disabling it in their TCP profile. This mechanism starts out not executing the Nagle algorithm, but uses heuristics to test if the receiver is using delayed acknowledgments on a connection; if not, it applies Nagle for the remainder of the connection. If delayed acks are in use, TCP will not wait to send packets but will still try to concatenate small packets into MSS-size packets when all are available. [UPDATE: v13.0 substantially improves this feature.] One small packet allowed per RTT: beginning with TMOS® v12.0, when in 'auto' mode that has enabled Nagle, TCP will allow one unacknowledged undersize packet at a time, rather than zero. This speeds up sending the sub-MTU tail of any message while not allowing a continuous stream of undersized packets. This averts the nightmare scenario above completely. Given these improvements, the Nagle algorithm is suitable for a wide variety of applications and environments. It's worth looking at both your applications and the behavior of your servers to see if Nagle is right for you.
