Bug 1589023 - Router port 1936 and kubernetes-nodes-exporter port 9100 port are not added to iptables
Summary: Router port 1936 and kubernetes-nodes-exporter port 9100 port are not added t...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1552235
Alias: None
Product: OpenShift Container Platform
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Hawkular
Version: 3.10.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: 3.10.z
Assignee: Simon Pasquier
QA Contact: Junqi Zhao
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2018-06-08 08:56 UTC by Junqi Zhao
Modified: 2018-10-16 12:18 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-06-10 23:56:14 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
no route to host error for kubernetes-nodes-exporter and openshift-router targets (125.98 KB, image/png)
2018-06-08 08:56 UTC, Junqi Zhao
no flags Details
status is UP after adding port to iptables (115.93 KB, image/png)
2018-06-08 08:57 UTC, Junqi Zhao
no flags Details

Description Junqi Zhao 2018-06-08 08:56:40 UTC
Created attachment 1448996 [details]
no route to host error for kubernetes-nodes-exporter and openshift-router targets

1936 and 9100 port are not added to iptables, this caused some kubernetes-nodes-exporter targets and openshift-router targets' status are DOWN in /targets page,
see the attached picture

# oc get po -n openshift-metrics -o wide
NAME                             READY     STATUS    RESTARTS   AGE       IP              NODE
prometheus-0                     6/6       Running   0          11m       10.128.0.11     qe-juzhao-310-qeos-1-master-etcd-1
prometheus-node-exporter-7vvnr   1/1       Running   0          11m       172.16.120.88   qe-juzhao-310-qeos-1-nrr-1
prometheus-node-exporter-cqdqv   1/1       Running   0          11m       172.16.120.63   qe-juzhao-310-qeos-1-master-etcd-1


# oc get po -n default -o wide | grep router
router-1-m9kqh             1/1       Running   0          5h        172.16.120.88   qe-juzhao-310-qeos-1-nrr-1

kubernetes-nodes-exporter
http://172.16.120.88:9100/metrics 
Get http://172.16.120.88:9100/metrics: dial tcp 172.16.120.88:9100: getsockopt: no route to host

openshift-router
https://172.16.120.88:1936/metrics
Get https://172.16.120.88:1936/metrics: dial tcp 172.16.120.88:1936: getsockopt: no route to host

# iptables-save | grep 9100
no result

# iptables-save | grep 1936
-A KUBE-SEP-657CTC4WPNAGXTKF -s 172.16.120.88/32 -m comment --comment "default/router:1936-tcp" -j KUBE-MARK-MASQ
-A KUBE-SEP-657CTC4WPNAGXTKF -p tcp -m comment --comment "default/router:1936-tcp" -m tcp -j DNAT --to-destination 172.16.120.88:1936
-A KUBE-SERVICES -d 172.30.229.84/32 -p tcp -m comment --comment "default/router:1936-tcp cluster IP" -m tcp --dport 1936 -j KUBE-SVC-4JCRTMMYZAAYMIJ2
-A KUBE-SVC-4JCRTMMYZAAYMIJ2 -m comment --comment "default/router:1936-tcp" -j KUBE-SEP-657CTC4WPNAGXTKF

after adding 1936 and 9100 port to iptables which the nodes show error "no route to host", kubernetes-nodes-exporter targets and openshift-router targets' status are changed to UP.
See the attached picture

# iptables -A IN_public_allow -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1936 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT
# iptables -A IN_public_allow -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9100 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT

Comment 1 Junqi Zhao 2018-06-08 08:57:36 UTC
Created attachment 1448997 [details]
status is UP after adding port to iptables

Comment 2 Simon Pasquier 2018-06-08 13:12:40 UTC
I've found existing entries describing the same problems:
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563888 for the node_exporter.
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1552235 for the router.

And a list of pending PRs 
- https://github.com/openshift/openshift-ansible/pull/7860 (node_exporter)
- https://github.com/openshift/openshift-ansible/pull/6920 (node_exporter for AWS deployments)
- https://github.com/openshift/openshift-ansible/pull/6636 (router)

@Junqi: probably best to mark this one as a duplicate?

Comment 3 Junqi Zhao 2018-06-10 23:56:14 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1563888 ***

Comment 4 Junqi Zhao 2018-06-10 23:57:18 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1571641 ***

Comment 5 Junqi Zhao 2018-06-10 23:58:23 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1552235 ***

Comment 6 Junqi Zhao 2018-06-10 23:58:56 UTC
(In reply to Junqi Zhao from comment #4)
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1571641 ***

ignore this comment please


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.