Base domain mapping broken for certain domains - google-cloud-run

I am trying to map a base domain name to a Google Cloud Run (fully managed) service. The following mappings work successfully:
Any Cloud Run service -> something.aaa.com (Immediately gives CNAME Records)
Any Cloud Run service -> bbb.com (Immediately gives A records)
Any Cloud Run service -> ccc.com (Immediately gives A records)
However, the following does not work:
Any Cloud Run service -> aaa.com (Spinner of death; never returned any DNS records after 12 hours)
Is there any where I can get more information on why this mapping is failing? The CLI also gives me a spinner when I run: gcloud beta run domain-mappings create --service $SERVICE_NAME --domain aaa.com
All domains were purchased through Google Domains . The only difference I can think of between aaa.com and bbb.com is that aaa.com was at some point using Cloudflare DNS, though I have since moved back to Google DNS.

This problem magically resolved itself after a few days. Possibly what fixed it was switching my DNS from Cloudflare back to Google DNS and waiting for that to trickle through.
If you're experiencing this issue, one workaround is to just use www.aaa.com as your canonical name instead of aaa.com. You can use a CNAME record to map www.aaa.com to your Cloud Run service. Many DNS providers (including Google DNS) will give you the ability to create a 301 Redirect from aaa.com to www.aaa.com.

Related

How do I set up bind via webmin to delegate dns lookups for certain subdomains?

I have several docker containers with some web applications running via docker compose. One of the containers is a custom DNS server with Bind and Webmin installed. Webmin gives a nice web UI allowing me to update Bind DNS configuration without directly modifying the files or SSHing into the container. I have docker setup to lookup DNS in this order:
my docker dns server
my companies internal dns server
google dns server
I have one master zone file for top level domain "example.com" defined in dns server 1. I added an address for server1.example.com and dns resolves correctly. I want other subdomains to be resolved from my companies internal dns server.
server1.example.com - resolves correctly
server2.example.com - this host is not referenced in the zone file for docker dns server. I would like to somehow delegate this to my companies dns server (server 2)
The goal is I should be able to do software development for web applications and deploy them on my docker containers. The code makes internal calls to other "example.com" hosts. I want some of those calls to get directed back to other docker containers rather than the real server because I am developing code on both and want to test it end to end.
I don't want to (and can't) modify my companies dns configuration. I am not an expert in bind or dns setup and looking for the simplest solution.
What configuration can achieve this?
I guess the workaround is to use fully qualified name when creating the zone file. Instead of creating a master zone example.com and listing server1 inside that zone I am creating a master zone with server1.example.com. It means I have to create a zone file for every server but I guess its ok to manage with a smaller number of hosts. server2.example.com then doesnt fall inside of a zone and gets resolved using the next dns server in the chain.

Programmatically check if Cloud Run domain mapping has done

I'm developing a service which will have a subdomain for each customer. So far I've set a DNS rule on Google Domains as
* | CNAME | 3600 | ghs.googlehosted.com.
and then I add the mapping for each subdomain in the Cloud Run console. I want to do all this programmatically everytime a new user registers.
The DNS rule will handle automatically any new subdomain, and to map it to the service I'll use the gcloud command:
gcloud beta run domain-mappings create --service frontend --domain sub.domain.com
Now, how can I check when the Cloud Run provisioning has done so that I can notify the customer that the platform is ready to use? I could CRON every minute the command gcloud beta run domain-mappings describe --domain sub.domain.com, parse the JSON output and check if the status has done. It's expensive, but it should work.
The problem is that even if the gcloud cli or the web console mark the provisioning as done, the platform isn't reachable for another 5-10 minutes, resulting in a ERR_CONNECTION_REFUSED error. The service logs show that a request to the subdomain is being made, but somehow it won't serve it.
I ended up using a load balancer as suggested. I followed this doc "Setting up a load balancer with Cloud Run, App Engine, or Cloud Functions", the only different thing is that I provided my own wildcard certificate (thanks to Let's Encrypt and certbox).
Now I can just use the Google Domains' API to instantly create a subdomain.

Azure Cloud Service microservice to K8 Migration

I am in the process of evaluating moving a very large Azure Cloud Service (Web Role) microservice architecture to AKS and have been working through the necessary code and build changes to support it.
In order to replicate the production environment locally for the developers, we run nginx on the host with SSL offloading and DNS (hosted in Azure) A records pointing to 127.0.0.1. When running in the Azure Emulator, the net affect is the ability for both the developer to visit the various web front ends in their browser (i.e. https://myapp.mydomain.dev) as well as hit the various API's in the solution (Web API 2) in Postman/cURL, etc.
Additionally due to how the networking of the Azure Emulator works, the apps themselves can resolve each other through nginx on the host (i.e. MVC app at https://myapp.mydomain.dev can obtain a token from the IdP web API at https://identity.mydomain.dev and then use that token at the API at https://api.mydomain.dev). This is the critical piece and the source of my question.
All attempts at getting the containers themselves to resolve each other the same way the host OS can (browser/Postman, SSL offloading via nginx) have failed. Many of the instructions out there are understandably for linux containers but having adapted the various networking docker-compose settings for the windows container equivalent have not yet yielded an success. In order to keep the development environments aligned with the real work systems, which are tenantized and make sure of the default mapping in nginx to catch all incoming traffic and route it to a specific user facing app/container, it is not as simple as determining a "static" method of addressing these on startup and why the effort was put in to produce the development environments we have today.
Right now when one service (container) attempts to communication with another, it ultimately results in a resolution error as all requests resolve to https://127.0.0.1 due to the DNS A records hosted in Azure for the domain. Since this migration will be a longer term project, the environments need to co-exist so changing the way that DNS is resolved (real DNS A records pointing to 127.0.0.1), host running nginx and handling SSL offloading to the various webroles normally running in the Azure Emulator is not an option.
Is there a way (with Windows containers) to either:
Allow the container to utilize nginx on the host OS transparently (app must still call the API at https://api.mydomain.dev), which will cause the traffic to be routed properly to the correct container/port defined in the docker-compose file?
OR
Run nginx on each container, allowing each container to then resolve and route appropriately without knowing the IP of the other container, possibly through an alias which could be added to the containers nginx.conf before the service starts?
The platform utilizes OAuth2/OIDC and it is critical to maintain the full URL to the other services from the applications perspective. Beyond mirroring production and sandbox environments, this URL's are utilized for redirect URL and post logout redirect URL validation among other things so using "https://myContainerNameForOtherContainerAlias" is not a workable solution.
Will I have the same problem when setting up the AKS environment as well?

Cloud Run - Custom Domain Mapping with Wildcard Subdomain

Our app utilizes subdomains like customerA.mydomain.com or customerB.mydomain.com, wherein the subdomains are unique publicly accessible storefronts that are "created" by our customers. We would like to route all *.mydomain.com to a particular Cloud Run service. We have already set up a wildcard subdomain CNAME in the DNS records to route to ghs.googlehosted.com., but how can we make Cloud Run accept requests from any subdomain?
You will need to map each subdomain to a service using API or gcloud commands. For example:
gcloud run domain-mappings create --service=myapp --domain=www.example.com
Technically this is because each service is with provisioned HTTP SSL certificate (built-in and provided out-of-the box for you without any charge), and there is no wildcard certificate issued by Google for your domain. That's why you cannot map a *(star) to a service. This means you need to instruct GCP Cloud Run service to map and issue a certificate request for each of your subdomain.
Also reach out to your Account Manager, as there are other limits on Cloud Run such as:
Maximum number of SSL certificates: 50 per top domain and per week

Connecting to scality/s3 server between docker containers

We are using a python based solution which shall load and store files from S3. For developing and local testing we are using a vagrant environment with docker and docker-compose. We have two docker-compose defintions - one for the assisting backend services (mongo, restheart, redis and s3) and the other one containing the python based REST API exposing solution using the backend services.
When our "front-end" docker-compose group interacts with restheart this works fine (using the name of the restheart container as server host in http calls). When we are doing the same with scality/s3 server this does not work.
The interesting part is, that we have created a test suite for using the scality/s3 server from a python test suite running on the host (windows10) over the forwarded ports through vagrant to the docker container of scality/s3 server within the docker-compose group. We used the endpoint_url localhost and it works perfect.
In the error case (when frontend web service wants to write to S3) the "frontend" service always responds with:
botocore.exceptions.ClientError: An error occurred (InvalidURI) when calling the CreateBucket operation: Could not parse the specified URI. Check your restEndpoints configuration.
And the s3server always responds with http 400 and the message:
s3server | {"name":"S3","clientIP":"::ffff:172.20.0.7","clientPort":49404,"httpMethod":"PUT","httpURL":"/raw-data","time":1521306054614,"req_id":"e385aae3c04d99fc824d","level":"info","message":"received request","hostname":"cdc8a2f93d2f","pid":83}
s3server | {"name":"S3","bytesSent":233,"clientIP":"::ffff:172.20.0.7","clientPort":49404,"httpMethod":"PUT","httpURL":"/raw-data","httpCode":400,"time":1521306054639,"req_id":"e385aae3c04d99fc824d","elapsed_ms":25.907569,"level":"info","message":"responded with error XML","hostname":"cdc8a2f93d2f","pid":83}
We are calling the scality with this boto3 code:
s3 = boto3.resource('s3',
aws_access_key_id='accessKey1',
aws_secret_access_key='verySecretKey1',
endpoint_url='http://s3server:8000')
s3_client = boto3.client('s3',
aws_access_key_id='accessKey1',
aws_secret_access_key='verySecretKey1',
endpoint_url='http://s3server:8000')
s3.create_bucket(Bucket='raw-data') # here the exception comes
bucket = self.s3.Bucket('raw-data')
This issue is quite common. In your config.json file, which you mount in your Docker container, I assume, there is a restEndpoints section, where you must associate a domain name with a default region. What that means is your frontend domain name should be specified in there, matching a default region.
Do note that that default region does not prevent you from using other regions: it's just where your buckets will be created if you don't specify otherwise.
In the future, I'd recommend you open an issue directly on the Zenko Forum, as this is where most of the community and core developpers are.
Cheers,
Laure

Resources