I have following problem:
Assume that I started two Docker containers on host machine: A and B.
docker run A -ti -p 2000:2000
docker run B -ti -p 2001:2001
I want to be able to get to each of this containers FROM INTERNET by:
http://example.com:2000
http://example.com:2001
How to reach that?
The rest of the equation here is just normal TCP / IP flow. You'll need to make sure of the following:
If the host has some an implicit deny for incoming traffic on its physical interface, you will need to open up ports 2000 and 2001, just like you would for any service (Docker or not).
If the host is behind a NAT or other external means of routing, you'll need to punch holes for those ports there as well.
You'll need the external IP address (either the one attached to the host or the one in front of the NAT allowing access to the ports).
As far as Docker is concerned, you've done what is required to open the ports to the service running in that container correctly.
Related
Here is my situation：
First，I run a MySQL container(IP:172.17.0.2) on centOS;
Then I run a Nacos contanier with specified datasource(MySQL above) on the same host, but i didn't use the ip of the MySQL container, instead I used the ip of the bridge Gateway(172.17.0.1)(two containers both link to the default bridge).
What surprised me was that Nacos works well, it can query config data from MySQL container normally.
How did this happen? I have read some documention but didn't get the answer.It really confused me.
On modern Docker installations, try to avoid using the default bridge network. docker network create a network (it doesn't need any special options, but it does need to be created) and then launch your containers on --net that network. If you're using Compose, it creates a ("user bridge") network named default for you.
On your CentOS host, if you run ifconfig, you should see a docker0 interface with the 172.17.0.1 address. When you launch a container with the docker run -p option, that container is accessible via the first port number on all host interfaces, including the docker0 interface.
Meanwhile, inside a container (on the default bridge network), it sees that same IP address as the normal IPv4 gateway address (try docker run --rm busybox route -n). So, when you connect to 172.17.0.1:3306, you're connecting out to the host, and then connecting to the published port of the database container.
This isn't a totally standard way to connect between containers, though it will work. You should prefer using Docker named networks, which will let you connect to another container using the container's name without manually doing any IP-address lookups. If you really can't move off of the default bridge network, then the standard approach is to --link to the other container, but this entire path is considered outdated.
I know that the title might be confusing so let me explain.
The is my current situation:
Server A - 127.0.0.1
Server B - 1.2.3.4.5
Server B opens a reverse tunnel to Server A. This gives me a random port on Server A to communicate with the Server B. Let's assume the port is 1337.
As I mentioned to access Server B I am sending packets to 127.0.0.1:1337.
Our client needs a Telnet connection. Since Telnet is insecure but a requirement, we decided to use telnet OVER the ssh reverse tunnel.
Moreover, we created an alpine container with busybox inside of it to eliminate any access to the host. And here is our problem.
The tunnel is created on the host, yet the telnet client is inside a docker container. Those are two separate systems.
I can share my host network with the docker with -network=host but it eliminates the encapsulation idea of the docker container.
Also binding the docker to host like that -p 127.0.0.1:1337:1337 screams that the port is already in use and it can't bind to that (duh ssh is using it)
Mapping ports from host to the container are also not working since the telnet client isn't forwarding the traffic to a specific port so we can't just "sniff" it out.
Does anyone have an idea how to overcome this?
I thought about sharing my host network and trying to configure iptables rules to limit the docker functionality over the network but my iptables skills aren't really great.
The port forward does not work, because that is basically the wrong direction. -p 127.0.0.1:1337:1337 means "take everything thats coming in on that host-port, and forward it into the container". But you want to connect from the container to that port on the host.
Thats basically three steps:
The following steps require atleast Docker v20.04
On the host: Bind your tunnel to the docker0 interface on the host (might require that you figure out the ip of that interface first). In other words, referring to your example, ensure that the local side of the tunnel does not end at 127.0.0.1:1337 but <ip of host interface docker0>:1337
On the host: Add --add-host host.docker.internal:host-gateway to your docker run command
Inside your container: telnet to host.docker.internal (magic DNS name) on the port you bound in step 2 (i.e. 1337)
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.
I'm using a Digital Ocean docker droplet and have 3 docker containers: 1 for front-end, 1 for back-end and 1 for other tools with different dependencies, let's call it back-end 2.
The front-end calls the back-end 1, the back-end 1 in turn calls the back-end 2. The back-end 2 container exposes a gRPC service over port 50051. Locally, by running the following command, I was able to identify the docker service to be running with the IP 127.17.0.1:
docker network inspect bridge --format='{{json .IPAM.Config}}'
Therefore, I understand that my gRPC server is accessible from the following url 127.17.0.1:50051 within the server.
Unfortunately, the gRPC server refuses connections when running from the docker droplet while it works perfectly well when running locally.
Any idea what may be different?
You should generally set up a Docker private network to communicate between containers using their container names; see e.g. How to communicate between Docker containers via "hostname". The Docker-internal IP addresses are subject to change if you delete and recreate a container and aren't reachable from off-host, and trying to find them generally isn't a best practice.
172.17.0.0/16 is a typical default for the Docker-internal IP network (127.0.0.0/8 is the reserved IPv4 loopback network) and it looks like you might have typoed the address you got from docker network inspect.
Try docker run with following command:
docker run -d -p {server ip}:12345 {back-end 2 image}
It will expose IP port to docker container and will be accessible from other servers.
Note: also check firewall rules, if firewall is blocking access.
You could run docker binding to ip and port as shown by Aakash. Please restrict access to this specific IP and port to be accessed only from the other docker IP and port - this will help to run docker private and doesn't allow other (even the other docker/instances within your network).
I'm new to Docker and Containers, and I'm trying to run a simple asp.net web app in a container but running into issues. My OS is Windows 10 Home, so I have to use the Docker Toolbox, which runs on a VM that only includes a basic Linux OS. When I spin up the container, it seems to start fine, but I can't view the app on the localhost.
$ docker run -p 8342:5000 -it jwarren:project
Hosting environment: Production
Content root path: /app
Now listening on: http://*:5000
Application started. Press Ctrl+C to shut down.
$ docker ps -a
CONTAINER ID IMAGE COMMAND CREATED STATUS PORTS NAMES
98cc4aed7586 jwarren:project "dotnet run" 8 minutes ago Up 8 minutes 0.0.0.0:8342->5000/tcp naughty_brattain
I've tried several different recommendations that I found on the web, but none have helped so far. However, my knowledge of networking is very limited, so maybe I'm not fully understanding what needs to be done. I've tried accessing it with the default VM machine IP and the container IP. I understand that the port forwarding does not carry over to the container. Any assistance would be great, as this project is due on Tuesday, and this is the last road block before finishing.
I found the following post that was really helpful: How to connect to a docker container from outside the host (same network) [Windows]. Following the steps below worked perfectly:
Open Oracle VM VirtualBox Manager
Select the VM used by Docker
Click Settings -> Network Adapter 1 should (default?) be "Attached
to:NAT"
Click Advanced -> Port Forwarding Add rule: Protocol TCP, Host Port
8080, Guest Port 8080 (leave Host IP and Guest IP empty)
You should now be able to browse to your container via localhost:8080 and your-internal-ip:8080.
Started up the container (Dockerfile EXPOSES 5000):
docker run -p 8080:5000 -it jwarren:project
Was able to connect with http://localhost:8080
There are few things to consider when working with a VM networking.
Virtual Box has 3 types of networking options NAT, Bridged and Host Only.
NAT would allow your VM to access internet through your internet. But won't allow your HOST machine to access the VM
Host Only network will create a network where the VM can reach the host machine and the Host can reach the VM. No internet using this network
Bridged network will allow your VM to assign another IP from your Wifi router or the main network. This IP will allow VM to have net access as well as access to other machines on the network. This will allow even the host machine to reach the IP
Now in most cases when you want to run Docker inside a VM and access that VM using the host machine you want the VM to have both NAT and Host only bridges
Now accessing your app on port 8342 needs few things checked
seliunx, firewalld, ufw are disabled on your VM (or properly configured to allow the port)
Your VM has a host only network or bridged network
iptables -S should not show REJECT rules
Some VMs come pre-configure to only allow port 22 from external network. So you should try access the app on <hostonlyip>:8342 or <bridgedip>:8342.
If you want to test if the app is up or not you can do the following
docker inspect <containerid> | grep IPA
Get the IP from this and run the command
curl http://<containerip>:5000/
This command needs to be execute inside the VM and not on your machine. If this command doesn't work then your container is not listening on 5000. Sometimes app listen to only 127.0.0.1 inside the container. This means they will work only inside the container and not outside. The app inside the container needs to listen to 0.0.0.0
If nothing works you can try an ssh tunnel approach
ssh -L 8342:127.0.0.1:8342 user#<VMIP>
And then you should be able to access the app on localhost:8342