Pass docker host ip as env var into devcontainer - docker

I am trying to pass an environment variable into my devcontainer that is the output of a command run on my dev machine. I have tried the following in my devcontainer.json with no luck:
"initializeCommand": "export DOCKER_HOST_IP=\"$(ifconfig | grep -E '([0-9]{1,3}.){3}[0-9]{1,3}' | grep -v 127.0.0.1 | awk '{ print $2 }' | cut -f2 -d: | head -n1)\"",
"containerEnv": {
"DOCKER_HOST_IP1": "${localEnv:DOCKER_HOST_IP}",
"DOCKER_HOST_IP2": "${containerEnv:DOCKER_HOST_IP}"
},
and
"runArgs": [
"-e DOCKER_HOST_IP=\"$(ifconfig | grep -E '([0-9]{1,3}.){3}[0-9]{1,3}' | grep -v 127.0.0.1 | awk '{ print $2 }' | cut -f2 -d: | head -n1)\"
],
(the point of the ifconfig/grep piped command is to provide me with the IP of my docker host which is running via Docker for Desktop (Mac))
Some more context
Within my devcontainer I am running some kubectl deployments (to a cluster running on Docker for Desktop) where I would like to configure a hostAlias for a pod (docs) such that that pod will direct requests to https://api.cancourier.local to the ip of the docker host (which would then hit an ingress I have configured for that CNAME).
I could just pass in the output of the ifconfig command to my kubectl command when running from within the devcontainer. The problem is that I get two different results from this depending on whether I am running it on my host (10.0.0.89) or from within the devcontainer (10.1.0.1). 10.0.0.89 in this case is the "correct" IP as if I curl this from within my devcontainer, or my deployed pod, I get the response I'd expect from my ingress.
I'm also aware that I could just use the name of my k8s service (in this case api) to communicate between pods, but this isn't ideal. As for why, I'm running a Next.js application in a pod. The Next.js app on this pod has two "contexts":
my browser - the app serves up static HTML/JS to my browser where communicating with https://api.cancourier.local works fine
on the pod itself - running some things (ie. _middleware) on the pod itself, where the pod does not currently know what https://api.cancourier.local
What I was doing to temporarily get around this was to have a separate config on the pod, one for the "browser context" and the other for things running on the pod itself. This is less than ideal as when I go to deploy this Next.js app (to Vercel) it won't be an issue (as my API will be deployed on some publicly accessible CNAME). If I can accomplish what I was trying to do above, I'd be able to avoid this.

So I didn't end up finding a way to pass the output of a command run on the host machine as an env var into my devcontainer. However I did find a way to get the "correct" docker host IP and pass this along to my pod.
In my devcontainer.json I have this:
"runArgs": [
// https://stackoverflow.com/a/43541732/3902555
"--add-host=api.cancourier.local:host-gateway",
"--add-host=cancourier.local:host-gateway"
],
which augments the devcontainer's /etc/hosts with:
192.168.65.2 api.cancourier.local
192.168.65.2 cancourier.local
then in my Makefile where I store my kubectl commands I am simply running:
deploy-the-things:
DOCKER_HOST_IP = $(shell cat /etc/hosts | grep 'api.cancourier.local' | awk '{print $$1}')
helm upgrade $(helm_release_name) $(charts_location) \
--install \
--namespace=$(local_namespace) \
--create-namespace \
-f $(charts_location)/values.yaml \
-f $(charts_location)/local.yaml \
--set cwd=$(HOST_PROJECT_PATH) \
--set dockerHostIp=$(DOCKER_HOST_IP) \
--debug \
--wait
then within my helm chart I can use the following for the pod running my Next.js app:
hostAliases:
- ip: {{ .Values.dockerHostIp }}
hostnames:
- "api.cancourier.local"

Highly recommend following this tutorial: Container environment variables
In this tutorial, 2 methods are mentioned:
Adding individual variables
Using env file
Choose which is more comfortable for you, good luck))

Related

Docker failed to load listeners, cannot assign requested address

I'm using this guide to try and run up Docker using WSL2. I've got everything starting however there is an issue when I actually try to run up Docker. Once I run the command sudo dockerd -H `ifconfig eth0 | grep -E "([0-9]{1,3}.){3}[0-9]{1,3}" | grep -v 127.0.0.1 | awk '{ print $2 }' | cut -f2 -d:
WARN[2022-02-01T11:07:40.033323500-06:00] Binding to IP address without --tlsverify is insecure and gives root access on this machine to everyone who has access to your network. host="tcp://169.254.77.26:2375"
WARN[2022-02-01T11:07:40.033991800-06:00] Binding to an IP address, even on localhost, can also give access to scripts run in a browser. Be safe out there! host="tcp://169.254.77.26:2375"
WARN[2022-02-01T11:07:41.036303800-06:00] Binding to an IP address without --tlsverify is deprecated. Startup is intentionally being slowed down to show this message host="tcp://169.254.77.26:2375"
WARN[2022-02-01T11:07:41.043536700-06:00] Please consider generating tls certificates with client validation to prevent exposing unauthenticated root access to your network host="tcp://169.254.77.26:2375"
WARN[2022-02-01T11:07:41.044564400-06:00] You can override this by explicitly specifying '--tls=false' or '--tlsverify=false' host="tcp://169.254.77.26:2375"
WARN[2022-02-01T11:07:41.045654100-06:00] Support for listening on TCP without authentication or explicit intent to run without authentication will be removed in the next release host="tcp://169.254.77.26:2375"
failed to load listeners: listen tcp 169.254.77.26:2375: bind: cannot assign requested address
I'm not too familiar with Docker so not sure what I can adjust to make it launch properly. Any suggestions are appreciated, thanks!
I'm doing exactly the same.
What worked for me was this comment https://dev.to/nelsonpena/comment/1jmkb . But it was not too explicit
I opened windows PowerShell and used the command
wsl --set-version Ubuntu 2
if you have another distro of linux it would be
wsl --set-version <distroname> 2
I closed wsl and opened it again. and executed the command
echo `ifconfig eth0 | grep -E "([0-9]{1,3}\.){3}[0-9]{1,3}" | grep -v 127.0.0.1 | awk '{ print $2;exit }' | cut -f2 -d:`
and got API listen on [the IP]

Kubernetes Deployment dynamic port forwarding

I am moving a Docker Image from Docker to a K8s Deployment. I have auto-scale rules on so it starts 5 but can go to 12. The Docker image on K8s starts perfectly with a k8s service in front to cluster the Deployment.
Now each container has its own JVM which has a Prometheus app retrieving its stats. In Docker, this is no problem because the port that serves Prometheus info is dynamically created with a starting port of 8000, so the docker-compose.yml grows the port by 1 based on how many images are started.
The problem is that I can't find how to do this in a K8s [deployment].yml file. Because Deployment pods are dynamic, I would have thought there would be some way to set a starting HOST port to be incremented based on how many containers are started.
Maybe I am looking at this the wrong way so any clarification would be helpful meanwhile will keep searching the Google for any info on such a thing.
Well after reading and reading and reading so much I came to the conclusion that K8s is not responsible to open ports for a Docker Image or provide ingress to your app on some weird port, it's not its responsibility. K8s Deployment just deploys the Pods you requested. You can set the Ports option on a DEPLOYMENT -> SPEC -> CONTAINERS -> PORTS which just like Docker is only informational. But this allows you to JSONPath query for all PODS(containers) with a Prometheus port available. This will allow you to rebuild the "targets" value in Prometheus.yaml file. Now having those targets makes them available to Grafana to create a dashboard.
That's it, pretty easy. I was complicating something because I did not understand it. I am including a script I QUICKLY wrote to get something going USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.
By the way, I use Pod and Container interchangeably.
#!/usr/bin/env bash
#set -x
_MyappPrometheusPort=8055
_finalIpsPortArray=()
_prometheusyamlFile=prometheus.yml
cd /docker/images/prometheus
#######################################################################################################################################################
#One container on the K8s System is weave and it holds the subnet we need to validate against.
#weave-net-lwzrk 2/2 Running 8 (7d3h ago) 9d 192.168.2.16 accl-ffm-srv-006 <none> <none>
_weavenet=$(kubectl get pod -n kube-system -o wide | grep weave | cut -d ' ' -f1 )
echo "_weavenet: $_weavenet"
#The default subnet is the one that lets us know the conntainer is part of kubernetes network.
# Range: 10.32.0.0/12
# DefaultSubnet: 10.32.0.0/12
_subnet=$( kubectl exec -n kube-system $_weavenet -c weave -- /home/weave/weave --local status | sed -En "s/^(.*)(DefaultSubnet:\s)(.*)?/\3/p" )
echo "_subnet: $_subnet"
_cidr2=$( echo "$_subnet" | cut -d '/' -f2 )
echo "_cidr2: /$_cidr2"
#######################################################################################################################################################
#This is an array of the currently monitored containers that prometheus was sstarted with.
#We will remove any containers form the array that fit the K8s Weavenet subnet with the myapp prometheus port.
_targetLineFound_array=($( egrep '^\s{1,20}-\s{0,5}targets\s{0,5}:\s{0,5}\[.*\]' $_prometheusyamlFile | sed -En "s/(.*-\stargets:\s\[)(.*)(\]).*/\2/p" | tr "," "\n"))
for index in "${_targetLineFound_array[#]}"
do
_ip="${index//\'/$''}"
_ipTocheck=$( echo $_ip | cut -d ':' -f1 )
_portTocheck=$( echo $_ip | cut -d ':' -f2 )
#We need to check if the IP is within the subnet mask attained from K8s.
#The port must also be the prometheus port in case some other port is used also for Prometheus.
#This means the IP should be removed since we will put the list of IPs from
#K8s currently in production by Deployment/AutoScale rules.
#Network: 10.32.0.0/12
_isIpWithinSubnet=$( ipcalc $_ipTocheck/$_cidr2 | sed -En "s/^(.*)(Network:\s+)([0-9]{1}[0-9]?[0-9]?\.[0-9]{1}[0-9]?[0-9]?\.[0-9]{1}[0-9]?[0-9]?\.[0-9]{1}[0-9]?[0-9]?)(\/[0-9]{1}[0-9]{1}.*)?/\3/p" )
if [[ "$_isIpWithinSubnet/$_cidr2" == "$_subnet" && "$_portTocheck" == "$_MyappPrometheusPort" ]]; then
echo "IP managed by K8s will be deleted: _isIpWithinSubnet: ($_ip) $_isIpWithinSubnet"
else
_finalIpsPortArray+=("$_ip")
fi
done
#######################################################################################################################################################
#This is an array of the current running myapp App containers with a prometheus port that is available.
#From this list we will add them to the prometheus file to be available for Grafana monitoring.
readarray -t _currentK8sIpsArr < <( kubectl get pods --all-namespaces --chunk-size=0 -o json | jq '.items[] | select(.spec.containers[].ports != null) | select(.spec.containers[].ports[].containerPort == '$_MyappPrometheusPort' ) | .status.podIP' )
for index in "${!_currentK8sIpsArr[#]}"
do
_addIPToMonitoring=${_currentK8sIpsArr[index]//\"/$''}
echo "IP Managed by K8s as myapp app with prometheus currently running will be added to monitoring: $_addIPToMonitoring"
_finalIpsPortArray+=("$_addIPToMonitoring:$_MyappPrometheusPort")
done
######################################################################################################################################################
#we need to recreate this string and sed it into the file
#- targets: ['192.168.2.13:3201', '192.168.2.13:3202', '10.32.0.7:8055', '10.32.0.8:8055']
_finalPrometheusTargetString="- targets: ["
i=0
# Iterate the loop to read and print each array element
for index in "${!_finalIpsPortArray[#]}"
do
((i=i+1))
_finalPrometheusTargetString="$_finalPrometheusTargetString '${_finalIpsPortArray[index]}'"
if [[ $i != ${#_finalIpsPortArray[#]} ]]; then
_finalPrometheusTargetString="$_finalPrometheusTargetString,"
fi
done
_finalPrometheusTargetString="$_finalPrometheusTargetString]"
echo "$_finalPrometheusTargetString"
sed -i -E "s/(.*)-\stargets:\s\[.*\]/\1$_finalPrometheusTargetString/" ./$_prometheusyamlFile
docker-compose down
sleep 4
docker-compose up -d
echo "All changes were made. Exiting"
exit 0
Ideally, you should be using the Average of JVM across all the replicas. There is no meaning to create a different deployment with a different port if you are running the single same Docker image across all the replicas.
i think keeping a single deployment with resource requirements set to deployment would be the best practice.
You can get the JVM average of all the running replicas
sum(jvm_memory_max_bytes{area="heap", app="app-name",job="my-job"}) / sum(kube_pod_status_phase{phase="Running"})
as you are running the same Docker image across all replicas and K8s service by default will be managing the Load Balancing, average utilization would be an option to monitor.
Still, if you want to filter and get different values you can create different deployments (Not at all good way) or use the stateful sets.
You can also filter the data by hostname (POD name) in Prometheus, so will get the each replica usage.

How to edit all the deployment of kubernetes at a time

We have hundreds of deployment and in the config we have imagePullPolicy set as “ifnotpresent” for most of them and for few it is set to “always” now I want to modify all deployment which has ifnotpresent to always.
How can we achieve this with at a stroke?
Ex:
kubectl get deployment -n test -o json | jq ‘.spec.template.spec.contianer[0].imagePullPolicy=“ifnotpresent”| kubectl -n test replace -f -
The above command helps to reset it for one particular deployment.
Kubernetes doesn't natively offer mass update capabilities. For that you'd have to use other CLI tools. That being said, for modifying existing resources, you can also use the kubectl patch function.
The script below isn't pretty, but will update all deployments in the namespace.
kubectl get deployments -o name | sed -e 's/.*\///g' | xargs -I {} kubectl patch deployment {} --type=json -p='[{"op": "replace", "path": "/spec/template/spec/containers/0/imagePullPolicy", "value": "Always"}]'
Note: I used sed to strip the resource type from the name as kubectl doesn't recognize operations performed on resources of type deployment.extensions (and probably others).

Run X application in a Docker container reliably on a server connected via SSH without "--net host"

Without a Docker container, it is straightforward to run an X11 program on a remote server using the SSH X11 forwarding (ssh -X). I have tried to get the same thing working when the application runs inside a Docker container on a server. When SSH-ing into a server with the -X option, an X11 tunnel is set up and the environment variable "$DISPLAY" is automatically set to typically "localhost:10.0" or similar. If I simply try to run an X application in a Docker, I get this error:
Error: GDK_BACKEND does not match available displays
My first idea was to actually pass the $DISPLAY into the container with the "-e" option like this:
docker run -ti -e DISPLAY=$DISPLAY name_of_docker_image
This helps, but it does not solve the issue. The error message changes to:
Unable to init server: Broadway display type not supported: localhost:10.0
Error: cannot open display: localhost:10.0
After searching the web, I figured out that I could do some xauth magic to fix the authentication. I added the following:
SOCK=/tmp/.X11-unix
XAUTH=/tmp/.docker.xauth
xauth nlist $DISPLAY | sed -e 's/^..../ffff/' | xauth -f $XAUTH nmerge -
chmod 777 $XAUTH
docker run -ti -e DISPLAY=$DISPLAY -v $XSOCK:$XSOCK -v $XAUTH:$XAUTH \
-e XAUTHORITY=$XAUTH name_of_docker_image
However, this only works if also add "--net host" to the docker command:
docker run -ti -e DISPLAY=$DISPLAY -v $XSOCK:$XSOCK -v $XAUTH:$XAUTH \
-e XAUTHORITY=$XAUTH --net host name_of_docker_image
This is not desirable since it makes the whole host network visible for the container.
What is now missing in order to get it fully to run on a remote server in a docker without "--net host"?
I figured it out. When you are connecting to a computer with SSH and using X11 forwarding, /tmp/.X11-unix is not used for the X communication and the part related to $XSOCK is unnecessary.
Any X application rather uses the hostname in $DISPLAY, typically "localhost" and connects using TCP. This is then tunneled back to the SSH client. When using "--net host" for the Docker, "localhost" will be the same for the Docker container as for the Docker host, and therefore it will work fine.
When not specifying "--net host", the Docker is using the default bridge network mode. This means that "localhost" means something else inside the container than for the host, and X applications inside the container will not be able to see the X server by referring to "localhost". So in order to solve this, one would have to replace "localhost" with the actual IP-address of the host. This is usually "172.17.0.1" or similar. Check "ip addr" for the "docker0" interface.
This can be done with a sed replacement:
DISPLAY=`echo $DISPLAY | sed 's/^[^:]*\(.*\)/172.17.0.1\1/'`
Additionally, the SSH server is commonly not configured to accept remote connections to this X11 tunnel. This must then be changed by editing /etc/ssh/sshd_config (at least in Debian) and setting:
X11UseLocalhost no
and then restart the SSH server, and re-login to the server with "ssh -X".
This is almost it, but there is one complication left. If any firewall is running on the Docker host, the TCP port associated with the X11-tunnel must be opened. The port number is the number between the : and the . in $DISPLAY added to 6000.
To get the TCP port number, you can run:
X11PORT=`echo $DISPLAY | sed 's/^[^:]*:\([^\.]\+\).*/\1/'`
TCPPORT=`expr 6000 + $X11PORT`
Then (if using ufw as firewall), open up this port for the Docker containers in the 172.17.0.0 subnet:
ufw allow from 172.17.0.0/16 to any port $TCPPORT proto tcp
All the commands together can be put into a script:
XSOCK=/tmp/.X11-unix
XAUTH=/tmp/.docker.xauth
xauth nlist $DISPLAY | sed -e 's/^..../ffff/' | sudo xauth -f $XAUTH nmerge -
sudo chmod 777 $XAUTH
X11PORT=`echo $DISPLAY | sed 's/^[^:]*:\([^\.]\+\).*/\1/'`
TCPPORT=`expr 6000 + $X11PORT`
sudo ufw allow from 172.17.0.0/16 to any port $TCPPORT proto tcp
DISPLAY=`echo $DISPLAY | sed 's/^[^:]*\(.*\)/172.17.0.1\1/'`
sudo docker run -ti --rm -e DISPLAY=$DISPLAY -v $XAUTH:$XAUTH \
-e XAUTHORITY=$XAUTH name_of_docker_image
Assuming you are not root and therefore need to use sudo.
Instead of sudo chmod 777 $XAUTH, you could run:
sudo chown my_docker_container_user $XAUTH
sudo chmod 600 $XAUTH
to prevent other users on the server from also being able to access the X server if they know what you have created the /tmp/.docker.auth file for.
I hope this should make it properly work for most scenarios.
If you set X11UseLocalhost = no, you're allowing even external traffic to reach the X11 socket. That is, traffic directed to an external IP of the machine can reach the SSHD X11 forwarding. There are still two security mechanism which might apply (firewall, X11 auth). Still, I'd prefer leaving a system global setting alone if you're fiddling with a user- or even application-specific issue like in this case.
Here's an alternative how to get X11 graphics out of a container and via X11 forwarding from the server to the client, without changing X11UseLocalhost in the sshd config.
+ docker container net ns +
| |
172.17.0.1 | 172.17.0.2 |
+- docker0 --------- veth123#if5 --|-- eth0#if6 |
| (bridge) (veth pair) | (veth pair) |
| | |
| 127.0.0.1 +-------------------------+
routing +- lo
| (loopback)
|
| 192.168.1.2
+- ens33
(physical host interface)
With the default X11UseLocalhost yes, sshd listens only on 127.0.0.1 on the root network namespace. We need to get the X11 traffic from inside the docker network namespace to the loopback interface in the root net ns. The veth pair is connected to the docker0 bridge and both ends can therefore talk to 172.17.0.1 without any routing. The three interfaces in the root net ns (docker0, lo and ens33) can communicate via routing.
We want to achieve the following:
+ docker container net ns +
| |
172.17.0.1 | 172.17.0.2 |
+- docker0 --------< veth123#if5 --|-< eth0#if6 -----< xeyes |
| (bridge) (veth pair) | (veth pair) |
v | |
| 127.0.0.1 +-------------------------+
routing +- lo >--ssh x11 fwd-+
(loopback) |
v
192.168.1.2 |
<-- ssh -- ens33 ------<-----+
(physical host interface)
We can let the X11 application talk directly to 172.17.0.1 to "escape" the docker net ns. This is achieved by setting the DISPLAY appropriately: export DISPLAY=172.17.0.1:10:
+ docker container net ns+
| |
172.17.0.1 | 172.17.0.2 |
docker0 --------- veth123#if5 --|-- eth0#if6 -----< xeyes |
(bridge) (veth pair) | (veth pair) |
| |
127.0.0.1 +-------------------------+
lo
(loopback)
192.168.1.2
ens33
(physical host interface)
Now, we add an iptables rule on the host to route from 172.17.0.1 to 127.0.0.1 in the root net ns:
iptables \
--table nat \
--insert PREROUTING \
--proto tcp \
--destination 172.17.0.1 \
--dport 6010 \
--jump DNAT \
--to-destination 127.0.0.1:6010
sysctl net.ipv4.conf.docker0.route_localnet=1
Note that we're using port 6010, that's the default port on which SSHD performs X11 forwarding: It's using display number 10, which is added to the port "base" 6000. You can check which display number to use after you've established the SSH connection by checking the DISPLAY environment variable in a shell started by SSH.
Maybe you can improve on the forwarding rule by only routing traffic from this container (veth end). Also, I'm not quite sure why the route_localnet is needed, to be honest. It appears that 127/8 is a strange source / destination for packets and therefore disabled for routing by default. You can probably also reroute traffic from the loopback interface inside the docker net ns to the veth pair, and from there to the loopback interface in the root net ns.
With the commands given above, we end up with:
+ docker container net ns +
| |
172.17.0.1 | 172.17.0.2 |
+- docker0 --------< veth123#if5 --|-< eth0#if6 -----< xeyes |
| (bridge) (veth pair) | (veth pair) |
v | |
| 127.0.0.1 +-------------------------+
routing +- lo
(loopback)
192.168.1.2
ens33
(physical host interface)
The remaining connection is established by SSHD when you establish a connection with X11 forwarding. Please note that you have to establish the connection before attempting to start an X11 application inside the container, since the application will immediately try to reach the X11 server.
There is one piece missing: authentication. We're now trying to access the X11 server as 172.17.0.1:10 inside the container. The container however doesn't have any X11 authentication, or not a correct one if you're bind-mounting the home directory (outside the container it's usually something like <hostname>:10). Use Ruben's suggestion to add a new entry visible inside the docker container:
# inside container
xauth add 172.17.0.1:10 . <cookie>
where <cookie> is the cookie set up by the SSH X11 forwarding, e.g. via xauth list.
You might also have to allow traffic ingress to 172.17.0.1:6010 in your firewall.
You can also start an application from the host inside the docker container network namespace:
sudo nsenter --target=<pid of process in container> --net su - $USER <app>
Without the su, you'll be running as root. Of course, you can also use another container and share the network namespace:
sudo docker run --network=container:<other container name/id> ...
The X11 forwarding mechanism shown above applies to the entire network namespace (actually, to everything connected to the docker0 bridge). Therefore, it will work for any applications inside the container network namespace.
In my case, I sit at "remote" and connect to a "docker_container" on "docker_host":
remote --> docker_host --> docker_container
To make debugging scripts easier with VScode, I installed SSHD into the "docker_container", reporting on port 22, mapped to another port (say 1234) on the "docker_host".
So I can connect directly with the running container via ssh (from "remote"):
ssh -Y -p 1234 appuser#docker_host.local
(where appuser is the username within the "docker_container". I am working on my local subnet now, so I can reference my server via the .local mapping. For external IPs, just make sure your router is mapped to this port to this machine.)
This creates a connection directly from my "remote" to "docker_container" via ssh.
remote --> (ssh) --> docker_container
Inside the "docker_container", I installed sshd with
sudo apt-get install openssh-server (you can add this to your Dockerfile to install at build time).
To allow X11 forwarding to work, edit the /etc/ssh/sshd_config file as such:
X11Forwarding yes
X11UseLocalhost no
Then restart the ssh within the container. You should do this from shell executed into the container, from the "docker_host", not when you are connected to the "docker_container" via ssh: (docker exec -ti docker_container bash)
Restart sshd:
sudo service ssh restart
When you connect via ssh to the "docker_container", check the $DISPLAY environment variable. It should say something like
appuser#3f75a98d67e6:~/data$ echo $DISPLAY
3f75a98d67e6:10.0
Test by executing your favorite X11 graphics program from within "docker_container" via ssh (like cv2.imshow())
I use an automated approach which can be executed entirely from within the docker container.
All that is needed is to pass the DISPLAY variable to the container, and mounting .Xauthority.
Moreover, it only uses the port from the DISPLAY variable, so it will also work in cases where DISPLAY=localhost:XY.Z.
Create a file, source-me.sh, with the following content:
# Find the containers address in /etc/hosts
CONTAINER_IP=$(grep $(hostname) /etc/hosts | awk '{ print $1 }')
# Assume the docker-host IP only differs in the last byte
SUBNET=$(echo $CONTAINER_IP | sed 's/\.[^\.]$//')
DOCKER_HOST_IP=${SUBNET}.1
# Get the port from the DISPLAY variable
DISPLAY_PORT=$(echo $DISPLAY | sed 's/.*://' | sed 's/\..*//')
# Create the correct display-name
export DISPLAY=$DOCKER_HOST_IP:$DISPLAY_PORT
# Find an existing xauth entry for the same port (DISPLAY_PORT),
# and copy everything except the dispay-name
# filtering out entries containing /unix: which correspond to "same-machine" connections
ENTRY=$(xauth -n list | grep -v '/unix\:' | grep "\:${DISPLAY_PORT}" | head -n 1 | sed 's/^[^ ]* *//')
# Prepend our display-name
ENTRY="$DOCKER_HOST_IP:$DISPLAY_PORT $ENTRY"
# Add the new xauth entry.
# Because our .Xauthority file is mounted, a new file
# named ${HOME}/.Xauthority-n will be created, and a warning
# is printed on std-err
xauth add $ENTRY 2> /dev/null
# replace the content of ${HOME}/.Xauthority with that of ${HOME}/.Xauthority-n
# without creating a new i-node.
cat ${HOME}/.Xauthority-n > ${HOME}/.Xauthority
Create the following Dockerfile for testing:
FROM ubuntu
RUN apt-get update
RUN apt-get install -y xauth
COPY source-me.sh /root/
RUN cat /root/source-me.sh >> /root/.bashrc
# xeyes for testing:
RUN apt-get install -y x11-apps
Build and run:
docker build -t test-x .
docker run -ti \
-v $HOME/.Xauthority:/root/.Xauthority:rw \
-e DISPLAY=$DISPLAY \
test-x \
bash
Inside the container, run:
xeyes
To run non-interactively, you must ensure source-me.sh is sourced:
docker run \
-v $HOME/.Xauthority:/root/.Xauthority:rw \
-e DISPLAY=$DISPLAY \
test-x \
bash -c "source source-me.sh ; xeyes"

Reach host with Docker Compose

I have a Docker Compose v2 file which starts a container. I locally run a service on port 3001. I want to reach this service from the Docker container.
The Docker Compose file looks like this:
version: '2'
services:
my-thingy:
image: my-image:latest
#network_mode: host #DOES not help
environment:
- THE_HOST_I_WANT_TO_CONNECT_TO=http://127.0.0.1:3001
ports:
- "3010:3010"
Now, how can I reach THE_HOST_I_WANT_TO_CONNECT_TO?
What I tried is:
Setting network_mode to host. This did not work. 127.0.0.1 could not be reached.
I can also see that I can reach the host from the container if I use the local IP of the host. A quick hack would be to use something like ifconfig | grep broadcast | awk '{print $2}' to obtain the IP and substitute that in Docker Compose. Since this IP can change on reconnect and different setups can have different ifconfig results, I am looking for a better solution.
I've used another hack/workarkound from comments in the docker issue #1143. Seems to Work For Me™ for the time being... Specifically, I've added the following lines in my Dockerfile:
# - net-tools contains netstat, used to discover IP of Docker host server.
# NOTE: the netstat trick is to make Docker host server accessible
# from inside Docker container under name 'dockerhost'. Unfortunately,
# as of 2016.10, there's no official/robust way to do this when Docker host
# has no public IP/DNS entry. What is used here is built based on:
# - https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/1143#issuecomment-39364200
# - https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/1143#issuecomment-46105218
# See also:
# - http://stackoverflow.com/q/38936738/98528
# - https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/8395#issuecomment-200808798
# - https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/23177
RUN apt-get update && apt-get install -y net-tools
CMD (netstat -nr | grep '^0\.0\.0\.0' | awk '{print $2" dockerhost"}' >> /etc/hosts) && \
...old CMD...
With this, I can use dockerhost as the name of the host where Docker is installed. As mentioned above, this is based on:
https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/1143#issuecomment-39364200
(...) One way is to rely on the fact that the Docker host is reachable through the address of the Docker bridge, which happens to be the default gateway for the container. In other words, a clever parsing of ip route ls | grep ^default might be all you need in that case. Of course, it relies on an implementation detail (the default gateway happens to be an IP address of the Docker host) which might change in the future. (...)
https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/1143#issuecomment-46105218
(...) A lot of people like us are looking for a little tidbit like this
netstat -nr | grep '^0\.0\.0\.0' | awk '{print $2}'
where netstat -nr means:
Netstat prints information about the Linux networking subsystem.
(...)
--route , -r
Display the kernel routing tables.
(...)
--numeric , -n
Show numerical addresses instead of trying to determine symbolic host, port or user names.
This is a known issue with Docker Compose: see Document how to connect to Docker host from container #1143. The suggested solution of a dockerhost entry in /etc/hosts is not implemented.
I went for the solution with a shell variable as also suggested in a comment by amcdl on the issue:
Create a LOCAL_XX_HOST variable: export LOCAL_XX_HOST="http://$(ifconfig en0 inet | grep "inet " | awk -F'[: ]+' '{ print $2 }'):3001".
Then, for example, refer to this variable in docker-compose like this:
my-thingy:
image: my-image:latest
environment:
- THE_HOST_I_WANT_TO_CONNECT_TO=${LOCAL_XX_HOST}

Resources