I know docker host network mode, which will let docker share the same network with host machine. It will not need NAT and you can visit the docker by the host ip adress.
My question is if start two docker both with host network mode, what will happened? I found that their IP addresses are the same, will their networks conflict?
Setting host networking generally disables Docker networking. It's almost never necessary, unless you have a program that can't be configured to listen on a fixed port or you have a program that listens on thousands of ports.
Since it disables Docker networking, containers that use host networking have direct access to the host network devices. If they set up network listeners, these share a port space with other host-network containers and non-container processes. You cannot remap ports, limit a port to being visible only to specific interfaces, or directly communicate with other containers if you have the host network. Containers don't have their own private IP address or port space in host-network mode.
Nothing stops you from starting multiple containers with host networking (in the same way you can start multiple non-container servers on the host directly), but if they try to listen to the same port on the same (host) interface(s), one of them will fail and you'll have to do application-specific reconfiguration to fix it.
Related
I am using Docker Windows with WSL2.
From some answers I understand that connecting to an IP address exposed to the host network can be done from within a Docker container without any particular setup, but I cannot do it. Note that I do not want to access localhost, but a specific IP address (and port) of another device exposed to the host network.
I read a couple reasons on what could be the issue:
Missing firewall exception to allow communication between the external IP and the IP of the container.
I may have to use network_mode: "host", which however only seems to work in Linux
Many thanks.
I have an headless server with VirtualBox. It run multiple virtual machines. One of them is a web proxy. It redirect external access to the right VM in function of the subdomain. Those VMs are communicating between them with internal network (intnet).
I would like to add some docker container to this configuration. How could I successfully create a network shared between my docker containers and this proxy VM ?
I tried to create a bridge network with docker docker network create my_net and then connect the VM with a additional network card in 'bridged' mode.
With this config ping works but not the actual connection. It isn't impossible to display the web page into a browser.
Am I missing some configuration here ? Also, is it a good practice to connect one VM to a docker network ?
Run the containers on one of the VMs. Use a totally normal Docker setup here: create a network for inter-container communication but don't configure it, and completely ignore the container-private network details and IP addresses.
When you use the docker run -p option, that will publish a container's port on its VM's network interface(s). From that point, other VMs can call the published port using that VM's IP address, just as if it were a non-container process running on the VM. Conversely, containers should be able to make outbound calls to the other VMs without special setup.
I'm looking for a way to access containers that are running on server in our company lan by domain names. By far I only managed to access them by IPs
So the setup is. Docker (for windows) is running on server srv1.ourdomain.com (Windows Server 2019), network for container is configured with l2bridge driver, container's dns name, as specifiedn in run command, is cont1. It is accessible by dns name on the docker host (srv1) and by IP from my machine.
What can I do to access the container by dns name cont1.ourdomain.com from my local machine located in the same lan?
I tried to use proxy (traefik) but it cant rewrite urls in the content, so web applications running inside the container are failing. Bacause of this I can't host multiple web application behind that proxy.
I know that it is possible to map container's port to host port and then it will be accessible from lan through the host name and host port, but applications I'm running are requiring many ports to be mapped (like 8 ports for each container) and with those containers being short-lived developer's environments it will be a hell to find a port pool when running new container.
So again if I can access container and its' ports by IP, is there a way to do the same by DNS name?
UPD1. Container host is a virtual server running on vmware. I tried to follow those recommendations and configure promiscuous mode. Thise doesn't help with dns though.
UPD2. I tried transparent network as well. For some reason DHCP can never assign propper IP and container ends up with autoconfigured ip from 168.x.x.x subnet.
You could create a transparent network and make the container discoverable on the network just like host. However, using host ports is what's recommended.
Did you try PathStrip or PathPrefixStrip with Traefik? That should let you rewrite the URLs for the backend.
My program is consisting of a network of ROS1 and ROS2 nodes, which are software that work with a publish/subscribe way of communication.
Assume there is 4 nodes running inside a custom network: onboard_network.
Those 4 nodes (ROS1) can only communicate together, therefore we have a bridge node (ROS1 & ROS2) that needs to be sitting on the edge on both onboard_network and host network. The reason why we need the host network is because the host is inside a VPN (Zerotier). Inside the VPN we have also our server (ROS2).
We also need the bride node to work with host network because ROS2 work with some multicast stuff that works only on host mode.
So basically, I want a docker compose file running 4 containers inside an onboard_network & a container running inside the host network. The last container needs to be seen from the containers in the onboard_network and being able to see them too. How could I do it ? Is it even possible ?
If you're running a container on the host network, its network setup is identical to a non-container process running on the host.
A container can't be set to use both host networking and Docker networking.
That means, for your network_mode: host container, it can call other containers using localhost as a hostname and their published ports: (because its network is the host's network). For your bridge-network containers, they can call the host-network container using the special hostname host.docker.internal on MacOS or Windows hosts, or on Linux they need to find some reachable IP address (this is discussed further in From inside of a Docker container, how do I connect to the localhost of the machine?.
i want to expose the container ip to the external network where the host is running so that i can directly ping the docker container ip from an external machine.
If i ping the docker container ip from the external machine where the machine hosting the docker and the machine from which i am pinging are in the same network i need to get the response from these machines
Pinging the container's IP (i.e. the IP it shows when you look at docker inspect [CONTAINER]) from another machine does not work. However, the container is reachable via the public IP of its host.
In addition to Borja's answer, you can expose the ports of Docker containers by adding -p [HOST_PORT]:[CONTAINER_PORT] to your docker run command.
E.g. if you want to reach a web server in a Docker container from another machine, you can start it with docker run -d -p 80:80 httpd:alpine. The container's port 80 is then reachable via the host's port 80. Other machines on the same network will then also be able to reach the webserver in this container (depending on Firewall settings etc. of course...)
Since you tagged this as kubernetes:
You cannot directly send packets to individual Docker containers. You need to send them to somewhere else that’s able to route them. In the case of plain Docker, you need to use the docker run -p option to publish a port to the host, and then containers will be reachable via the published port via the host’s IP address or DNS name. In a Kubernetes context, you need to set up a Service that’s able to route traffic to the Pod (or Pods) that are running your container, and you ultimately reach containers via that Service.
The container-internal IP addresses are essentially useless in many contexts. (They cannot be reached from off-host at all; in some environments you can’t even reach them from outside of Docker on the same host.) There are other mechanisms you can use to reach containers (docker run -p from outside Docker, inter-container DNS from within Docker) and you never need to look up these IP addresses at all.
Your question places a heavy emphasis on ping(1). This is a very-low-level debugging tool that uses a network protocol called ICMP. If sending packets using ICMP is actually core to your workflow, you will have difficulty running it in Docker or Kubernetes. I suspect you aren’t actually. Don’t worry so much about being able to directly ping containers; use higher-level tools like curl(1) if you need to verify that a request is reaching its container.
It's pretty easy actually, assuming you have control over the routing tables of your external devices (either directly, or via your LAN's gateway/router). Assuming your containers are using a bridge network of 172.17.0.0/16, you add a static entry for the 172.17.0.0/16 network, with your Docker physical LAN IP as the gateway. You might need to also allow this forwarding in your Docker OS firewall configuration.
After that, you should be able to connect to your docker container using its bridge address (172.17.0.2 for example). Note however that it will likely not respond to pings, due to the container's firewall.
If you're content to access your container using only the bridge IP (and never again use your Docker host IP with the mapped-port), you can remove port mapping from the container entirely.
You need to create a new bridge docker network and attach the container to this network. You should be able to connect by this way.
docker network create -d bridge my-new-bridge-network
or
docker network create --driver=bridge --subnet=192.168.0.0/16 my-new-bridge-network
connect:
docker network connect my-new-bridge-network container1
or
docker network connect --ip 192.168.0.10/16 my-new-bridge-network container-name
If the problem persist, just reload docker daemon, restart the service. Is a known issue.