Issue with 2 parallel F5 clusters
Hello everybody and first of all thank you for taking the time to read my issue! The issue that I have is in regards to a migration We have a productive F5 BigIP cluster (Active/Standby), let's call this "Old F5", which has a lot of Virtual Servers in partitions, with specific pools and monitors for each application/service This device also has 2 Vlans, internal (vlan11) and external (vlan10), and 2 interfaces in an LACP that it's tagged on both Vlans, and it's connected to the same one leg to a Cisco APIC It has 2 Self IP addresses (one for each Vlan): 10.10.10.1-Vlan "external" 10.20.20.1-Vlan "internal" (numbers are just for example) It also has 4 Floating IP address (2 for each Vlan) with 2 traffic groups: 10.10.10.2-Vlan external traffic group 1 10.10.10.3-Vlan external traffic group 2 10.20.20.2-Vlan internal traffic group 1 10.20.20.3-Vlan internal traffic group 2 This device (cluster) has to be replaced by another F5 BigIP cluster (let's call this new F5), this device is an identical copy to the old F5 (the config was took from the old one and imported to the new one), meaning same Vlans, monitors, pools, VServers IP addresses etc At the moment this one has the 2 interfaces disabled and a blackhole default reject route set up in order to not interfere with the old F5 which is the productive one. The ideea is to configure the new F5 device with IP addresses from the same subnet (for example 10.10.10.5), and disable all the Virtual Servers so it doesn't handle traffic (the nodes, monitors, pools stay up on both devices), and have the 2 F5 devices, old and new, running in parallel and then move the Virtual servers one by one by just disabling the VS on the old F5 and enable it on the new F5. At this point we also remove the blackhole route, configure the correct default static route (the same which is on the old F5), and enable the interfaces This sounded and looked good, on the new F5 the nodes, pools are green and the Virtual servers are disabled as expected. On the old productive F5 everything is up and green BUT if I try to reach one of the Virtual servers, either by the Virtual IP address or hostname the attempt just times out without any response (if I try to telnet to the VS on port 443 it connects meaning that the old F5 accepts the traffic) I tried to disable on the new F5 also the nodes but still the same behaviour, the only to get it back to work is to disable the interfaces on the new F5 and add the default reject blackhole route. This is not how I imagined it to work, in my mind I was expecting that the old F5 will work as normal, and the new F5 device will see the nodes and pools up (confirming good communication) but don't handle any traffic regarding the Virtual servers because they are disabled. Does anyone have any idea what is causing this issue, why when both F5 devices are up in parallel, the connection to the Virtual server through the old productive F5 times out while that F5 sees both the pools and Virtual servers as up and running. Thank you in advance!
F5 migration
hi, We are working migrate F5 from Viprion hosted guest to new R10900 Tennent, both old and new running on 17.x version but old F5 has huge number of as3 deployed config from big-iq and 200+ legacy vips.. What is best way we can migrate this kind mixed environment and how to make sure big-iq still works fine with new target post migration..
Issue while migrating config from 4000s to r4600
Hi All, we are trying to migrate config from 4000s to r4600. We have created UCS on 4000s but while loading it on a tenant on r4600, we got an error saying ""load sys partition all platform migrate " - failed -- 010713d0:3: Symmetric Unit key decrypt failure - decrypt failure, configuration loading error: high-config-load-failed". Before loading the UCS from 4000s device to tenant, we copied the master key to the new tenant and verified it as well. The command used to load the UCS : load sys ucs <file name> no-license platform-migrate Didn't see any other error logs in /var/log/ltm. Could someone suggest how to resolve this issue ? Please note we are using a CA device certificate and not self signed certificate for the device. Also the management IP, trunk name and number of trunk ports in the UCS are different from those on the tenant.
Upgrading BIGIP 2000S to R2600
Hi, I have a pair of BIGIP 2000 licensed with LTM and need to upgrade the hardware to R2600. I have some backend nodes pointing to F5 as their gateways. 2000 appliances run code v15.1. Will it be doable to archive CSF file of old F5s, edit some names related to 2000s like hostname and license with new names of 2600s, load the file on new F5s? I'm thinking to use different mgmt IP but keep all other configuration of VS, Vlans, IPs as they are. Also, what about license and certificate files? Thank you!
Migration From BIG-IP V15.1.10.2 TO BIG IP-17.1.1.3.0.76.5 on VE
Hi Community, Need you support. Currently VM is on BIG-IP V15.1.10.2 and we are deploying a new VM on BIG IP-17.1.1.3.0.76.5. Could you please confirm will there be any config syntax changes as planning to upload to existing file SCF file on new new. Please comment on this.Migration projects - how to avoid IP conflicts
Hi, Wonder if there is smarter/easier way to avoid IP conflicts during migrations - in the phase when production and new service should listen on the same IP. Scenario: All VIPs in 192.168.1.0/24 subnet All traffic to VIPs is coming via external router (no clients in 192.168.1.0/24 subnet) Production device IP: 192.168.1.254 Production VIP: 192.168.1.100 New device IP: 192.168.1.253 New VIP: 192.168.1.100 Traffic from any client except test station (192.168.10.100) should hit VIP at production device BIG-IP setup: Floating IP: 192.168.1.253 VIP: 192.168.1.100; ARP disabled External router setup: Route: From 192.168.10.100 to 192.168.1.100/32 gw 192.168.1.253 One important note: virtual-address object for VS has to be created in advance via tmsh. For example using tmsh load sys config from-terminal merge and similar config: ltm virtual-address 192.168.1.100 { address 192.168.1.100 arp disabled mask 255.255.255.255 traffic-group traffic-group-1 } or of course any other suitable way. Reason for that is simple - auto created virtual-address objects (created when VS is created) always has ARP enabled. After finishing testing all virtual-address objects can be updated with ARP enabled using simple bash script like below: !/bin/sh $1 contains source file with VIP to place in array $2 contains enable or disable to turn on and off ARP fro VIP if [ -z "$1" ] then bad arguments - quit echo "Syntax: vip_arp_enable-disable_from-file.sh " else mapfile -t myArray < $1 local count = 0 for vip in "${myArray[@]}" do echo "Vip is: $vip"; tmsh modify ltm virtual-address $vip arp $2; ((++count)); done echo "$count processed" fi With above script it's possible to both enable and disable ARP, file with list of virtual-addresses to be processed. Result: Traffic from any client (except sourced from 192.168.10.100) is just send to 192.168.1.100 based on MAC in ARP Reply send to 192.168.1.0/24 subnet by router. BIG-IP never responds to ARP Request for 192.168.1.100 (ARP disabled on this VIP) Traffic from sourced from 192.168.10.100 is send to 192.168.1.253 (next hop, using 192.168.1.253 MAC as target and 192.168.1.100 as target IP), then internally BIG-IP is able to route this packet to configured VS with 192.168.1.100. Tested and working, but maybe not optimal approach? What I am afraid is if ARP cache on router will not be issue - like when production traffic is routed MAC of production VIP is cached, then when test traffic is processed (to the same IP as production) this cached entry will be used - traffic will reach production instead of test VIP - never happened in my lab but it's not 100% confirmation it would not fail. Router simulated using other BIG IP with two VSs: Wildcard (Forwarding IP) accepting traffic to subnet 192.168.1.0/24 Wildcard (PerformanceL4): Source Address: 192.168.10.100/32 Destination Address/Mask: 192.168.1.0/24 All ports All protocols Address Translation and Port Translation: disabled Pool with Pool Member: 192.168.1.253 (Floating IP of other BIG-IP)Migration projects - how to avoid IP conflicts
Hi, Wonder if there is smarter/easier way to avoid IP conflicts during migrations - in the phase when production and new service should listen on the same IP. Scenario: All VIPs in 192.168.1.0/24 subnet All traffic to VIPs is coming via external router (no clients in 192.168.1.0/24 subnet) Production device IP: 192.168.1.254 Production VIP: 192.168.1.100 New device IP: 192.168.1.253 New VIP: 192.168.1.100 Traffic from any client except test station (192.168.10.100) should hit VIP at production device BIG-IP setup: Floating IP: 192.168.1.253 VIP: 192.168.1.100; ARP disabled External router setup: Route: From 192.168.10.100 to 192.168.1.100/32 gw 192.168.1.253 One important note: virtual-address object for VS has to be created in advance via tmsh. For example using tmsh load sys config from-terminal merge and similar config: ltm virtual-address 192.168.1.100 { address 192.168.1.100 arp disabled mask 255.255.255.255 traffic-group traffic-group-1 } or of course any other suitable way. Reason for that is simple - auto created virtual-address objects (created when VS is created) always has ARP enabled. After finishing testing all virtual-address objects can be updated with ARP enabled using simple bash script like below: !/bin/sh $1 contains source file with VIP to place in array $2 contains enable or disable to turn on and off ARP fro VIP if [ -z "$1" ] then bad arguments - quit echo "Syntax: vip_arp_enable-disable_from-file.sh " else mapfile -t myArray < $1 local count = 0 for vip in "${myArray[@]}" do echo "Vip is: $vip"; tmsh modify ltm virtual-address $vip arp $2; ((++count)); done echo "$count processed" fi With above script it's possible to both enable and disable ARP, file with list of virtual-addresses to be processed. Result: Traffic from any client (except sourced from 192.168.10.100) is just send to 192.168.1.100 based on MAC in ARP Reply send to 192.168.1.0/24 subnet by router. BIG-IP never responds to ARP Request for 192.168.1.100 (ARP disabled on this VIP) Traffic from sourced from 192.168.10.100 is send to 192.168.1.253 (next hop, using 192.168.1.253 MAC as target and 192.168.1.100 as target IP), then internally BIG-IP is able to route this packet to configured VS with 192.168.1.100. Tested and working, but maybe not optimal approach? What I am afraid is if ARP cache on router will not be issue - like when production traffic is routed MAC of production VIP is cached, then when test traffic is processed (to the same IP as production) this cached entry will be used - traffic will reach production instead of test VIP - never happened in my lab but it's not 100% confirmation it would not fail. Router simulated using other BIG IP with two VSs: Wildcard (Forwarding IP) accepting traffic to subnet 192.168.1.0/24 Wildcard (PerformanceL4): Source Address: 192.168.10.100/32 Destination Address/Mask: 192.168.1.0/24 All ports All protocols Address Translation and Port Translation: disabled Pool with Pool Member: 192.168.1.253 (Floating IP of other BIG-IP)
Convert HTTP Class iRules for version 11.5.1 or later
Hello Folks, I had a customer who is using the old version of iRules, which contains HTTP Class selected commands, and now they want to upgrade to 11.5.1. The command is no longer supporting in that version and I am not able to convert it to compatible way to accept that iRule in 11.5.1 Sample iRule from the customer setup is as following. ltm rule /Common/Ems_staging_admins { when HTTP_REQUEST { if { [class match [IP::client_addr] equals "disable_asm_ip_ranges"] }{ HTTP::class select /Common/cls_EMS_staging_admin } else { HTTP::class select /Common/cls_EMS_staging } } } ltm rule /Common/efax_smtp_allow { when CLIENT_ACCEPTED { if { [class match [IP::client_addr] equals "allowed_ip_efax"] }{ log local0. "allowed to relay from [IP::client_addr]" } else { drop log local0. "Not allowed to relay from [IP::client_addr]" } } There are 2 iRules, and many more which needs to get edited. Can anyone shed some light on how can I modify the iRule in a way where it can be applied on 11.5.1 I have tried to follow the article, however I couldn't fix it. Thank you, DarshanHTTP Class to iRule Migration for 11.4.0 or later.
Hello Folks, I am working on a migration project for one of the customers who is running 11.2.1 HF8 currently and upgrading to 11.6.0. I have converted most of the HTTP Classes/iRule for 11.6.0 however there is one iRule is causing trouble. Current HTTP Class looks as following. paths { /geoportal(/.*)\? /arcgis(/.*)\? /directories(/.*)\? /mapviewer(/.*)\? /mapviewerar(/.*)\? /mapviewerbeta(/.*)\? /geoportalbeta(/.*)\? /proxy(/.*)\? /arcgis_js_api(/.*)\? /ogc(/.*)\? /tokenservice(/.*)\? /rest(/.*)\? /OntologyService(/.*)\? /services(/.*)\? } pool /Common/SDI_Pool_8085 Since the HTTP Path needs to be defined which matches the regex, I couldn't make further progress. Can anyone help me to configure an iRule to achieve the above? Any help will be highly appreciated. Thanks, Darshan
