My understanding is that a CLB (Classic Load Balancer) is placed in a subnet and so we configure Security Group and NACL for it.
However, when it comes to ALB (Application Load Balancer), we don't configure NACL (Network ACL). Why? Architecturally where is it placed in a VPC?
As extension, how is NLB (Network Load Balancer) placed architecturally in a VPC?
Can you help me visualize the deployment of these components?
ALBs can span all subnets in VPC. They are not bound directly to subnets, but rather to TargetGroups which are themselves then bound (indirectly) to subnets.
So a single ALB could theoretically route to both private and public subnets within a VPC.
Because of this, and because the fact that ALBs span the VPC, they benefit from the default VPC ACL which permits IPV4 between hosts within the VPC. You can configure ACLs on the subnets that will be routed to by the ALB/NLB but in this case you need to remember that custom ACLS are by default closed to all traffic, rather than open within the VPC like the default ACL.
It would normally make sense to segregate your ALBs into public or private zones by security group and target group, but this is configuration rather than architectural placement - there is nothing preventing you from adding a rule to route specific paths or ports to a public subnet from an ALB that has until then been serving private subnets only.
Related
Question
Is there a way to make sure accesses are coming only from a specific NLB? Under the current NLB limitations, I am not sure if there is a way.
Limitations
AWS Network Load Balancer (NLB) does not have Security Group (SG), hence cannot use SG to verify the source is NLB.
NLB (instance ID target) preserves the source IP address of the external client, hence cannot use source IP to verify the source is NLB.
References
Network Load Balancers don't have Security Groups
Source IP Preservation
If you specify targets using an instance ID, the source IP addresses of the clients are preserved and provided to your applications.
One way you could possibly do this is by provisioning the NLB and its EC2 in a separate private subnet reserved just for them, and ensuring your routing rules do not allow other subnets in the VPC to route to the segregated private subnet.
As in the AWS NLB Document - Target Security Groups, cannot identify a NLB and make sure the access is only from the NLB if target type is instance. Need to use the client IP address which accesses the NLB.
Limits
Network Load Balancers do not have associated security groups. Therefore, the security groups for your targets must use IP addresses to allow traffic from the load balancer.
You cannot allow traffic from clients to targets through the load balancer using the security groups for the clients in the security groups for the targets. Use the client CIDR blocks in the target security groups instead.
Place the EC2 machines in private subnets, if they need to access internet set the route table for destination 0.0.0.0/0 to nat gateway id. So EC2 machines can access the internet via nat but no one can access your ec2 instances from outside of the vpc.
Then you can set inbound rules for your EC2 instances even for 0.0.0.0/0. Again no one (outside of the vpc) can directly access your EC2 instances since they are private subnet. If you set a NLB and attach EC2 instances on it, only connections (according to your NLB listeners rule) are allowed to instances.
You can put EC2 on the NAT subnet, and then point to this EC2 through NLB. This way, although your EC2 security group is set to 0.0.0.0/0, only NLB can access it.
I have a few elastic beanstalk applications on the same VPC (which can also be reduced to one application), and I'd like them to be accessible both via one IP address (both inbound and outbound traffic), and via their own URL. I've seen that this can be done via NAT, but I haven't found documentation on whether this is all traffic (in both directions) and if it can be done alongside the original endpoints. Another question is whether there is a better way to do this.
NAT is used to provide access to internet for instances in private subnets. In this case all instances in the subnet will have the same external IP. But you won't be able to access your private instances using that IP, it's only for outbound traffic.
In your case I'd go with a ELB. Following the best practices, keep your instances with running applications in private subnets and:
Have an external facing ELB in public subnets (you'll need at least 2 public subnets in different AZs).
Create a Target Group and add your instances with running apps to it.
Assign the Target Group to the listener on your ELB.
Configure the security groups on ELB and app instances to allow the traffic on the port the applications are serving (usually it's 8080).
As a result you'll have your instances accessible by the ELB URL. If you want to have a pretty URL, you can configure it in Route 53 and resolve it to the ELB URL.
Its not possible by using aws provided NAT cluster but can be achieved by hosting a box with both Load balancer and NAT running in the same instance with EIP, map your domain with that IP for incoming traffic, for outgoing traffic in the route table of private app subnet you configure the NAT as target for all the 0.0.0.0/0 route, But it is not the recommended approach since the front facing instance becomes SPOF.
The recommended way is using ELB as a front facing and NAT cluster as outgoing for high HA.
Has someone configured a NLB in the public subnets of your VPC to route traffic to EC2 instances that are in the private subnets?
When using an ELB, a good solution is to create a Security Group for the ELB and then create another SecurityGroup for the private EC2 Instances, allowing incoming traffic from that ELB Security Group, as explained here:
https://aws.amazon.com/premiumsupport/knowledge-center/public-load-balancer-private-ec2/
"You can also add a rule on the instance’s security group to allow traffic from the security group assigned to the load balancer. For example, if the security group on the load balancer is sg-1234567a, make the following changes on the security group associated with the private instances"
Since you cannot associate a Security Group to a NLB, how could you accomplish this with the same type of security?
Thanks!
Since you cannot associate a Security Group to a NLB, how could you
accomplish this with the same type of security?
The security aspect does not change.
NLB is a different beast, it not the same as classic Load Balancers. For Classic Load Balancers, from the point of view of your instances, traffic does appear to come from inside the VPC. From outside, traffic goes to a (random and mutating) list of IP addresses, resolved by the DNS record that AWS provides to you.
Network Load Balancers are completely different. From the point of view of your instances, they are completely invisible. If it is an external network load balancer, traffic appears to be coming from instances on the internet directly (even though this is an illusion). Therefore, if you want to talk to everyone on the internet, 0.0.0.0/0 is what you open it to.
This is, in fact, what the documentation says:
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/elasticloadbalancing/latest/network/target-group-register-targets.html#target-security-groups
Recommended Rules
Inbound Source Port Range Comment
Client IP addresses instance listener Allow traffic from clients on the instance listener port
VPC CIDR health check Allow traffic from the load balancer on the health check port
Client IP addresses is whatever your client IPs are. If they are on the open internet, 0.0.0.0/0 it is. Adding the NLB private IP address, as I saw in other responses, accomplishes nothing. Traffic is not coming from there, as far as the instances are concerned.
On the security angle, nothing changes. Since your instances are in private subnets, traffic cannot flow directly to them, as there is a NAT gateway in the middle. It can only flow from them to the internet (through NAT gateway, then internet gateway). Even if you specify all traffic is allowed from everywhere, traffic still won't come. It will have to come through another way. In your case, that way is the NLB, which has a fixed number of ports it listens to, and only sends traffic to the destination ports on the instances you specify.
If you are moving from classic Load Balancers to NLBs, move the security group rules from the Load Balancer to your instances. Or better yet, since you can have multiple security groups, just add the SG you currently have for the classic LB to the instances(and update any ASGs as needed). Your security posture will be exactly the same. With the added benefit that now your applications won't need things like proxy protocol to figure out where traffic is coming from, it is no longer obfuscated by the load balancer.
That is indeed true as per AWS Documentation :
Network Load Balancers do not have associated security groups.
Therefore, the security groups for your targets must use IP addresses
to allow traffic from the load balancer.
So If you do not want to grant access to the entire VPC CIDR, you can grant access to the private IP addresses used by the load balancer nodes. There is one IP address per load balancer subnet.
On NLB Tab of there is one Network Interface per Load Balancer from there :
On the Details tab for each network interface, copy the address from
Primary private IPv4 IP.
You can use this private IP Address at add it SG of EC2 Instances.
Please Refer to AWS Documentation
Tail your http access logs and you will see there is no changing of source IP address from the network load balancer which means you need to allow 0.0.0.0/0 on the endpoints security group if the internet needs access to your endpoint.
This is only ok if you use a private subnet so be careful if you have this server on a public subnet as this solution would not be advisable. In this case just use an application load balancer. You can still setup the same listener and configure a target group by instance as well. The application load balancer will update the source IP address to it's own private address if you tail the access logs. The advantage of this is you only need to allow https traffic to the app load balancer and then you can accept http for the target group if you like from the load balancer.
I was setting up an environment using Elastic Beanstalk and I wanted the hosts to be apart of the default VPC for my account. I didn't really understand what the options meant. See the below image for an example:
Associate Public IP Address - How does this differ from the ELB visibility?
Subnets for ELB and EC2 - What do these do? The set-up wizard requires at least one box is selected. During my setup I selected all of the boxes.
VPC Security Group - How does this differ from the security group of the EC2 hosts. I use the security groups to SSH onto the hosts. Why does the VPC need a security group?
If selected, the ELB will be created with a public IP address associated to it (or the EC2 instance will if you select single instance instead of load balanced during the setup). Visibility is just for ACLs, and won't actually give it a publically accessible IP.
In a common VPC setup, you'll have both public and private subnets with a NAT in between them. Things in the public subnet can usually access the Internet and private subnet. Private subnet can usually just access the local subnet. In a load balanced EB environment, you'd typically place the ELB in the public subnet and the EC2 instance(s) in the private subnet.
VPC security groups are for your resources (anything in your VPC). They're just prefixed with the term VPC so as to distinguish between VPC security groups and legacy EC2 security groups (for EC2 instances that are not part of any VPC). The option in the UI only affects the EC2 resources in your VPC though I believe...not the ELB.
I'm putting the instances behind the aws loadbalancer, I have configured the routable and attached the IGW to it, created the loadbalancer and added this instance to the aws loadbalancer every things work well, the endpoint URL of the AWS loadbalancer able to load the HTTP pages
Now i have removed the IGW from the route table and tested it again, the AWS loadbalalncer endpoint URL not able to load the page, but the instace status shows in AWS loadbalancer as inService
Why the IGW is required when loadbalancer is configured over private subnet, it technically Mean it's a public subnet, which is blocking me to create a NAT inatance
A subnet without a default route pointing to the igw-xxxxxxxx Internet Gateway object is, by definition, a private subnet. If you remove the igw from a public subnet, you now have a private subnet.
Placing an Internet-facing load balancer (ELB) in such a private subnet is incorrect.
It sounds as though you are making a commonly-made -- but incorrect -- assumption that the ELB should be configured in the same subnets as the instances behind it. This is also incorrect.
Provision the ELB in public subnets, without regard to the subnets the instances behind it were placed in.
In summary:
Internet-facing ELB requires a public subnet for placement.
NAT instance requires a public subnet for placement.
The instances that use these services (NAT and ELB) belong in different -- private -- subnets, different subnets than the ELB and NAT instances.
ELB and NAT can be placed together in the same subnets, or separately, as long as the subnets are public (have the IGW as their default route) and are in the same availability zones.
I believe you cannot do anything without the IGW attached to the routing table where the subnet is attached to.
Another way to do this is to spin off a NAT instance(can be found in AWS marketplace) in the public subnet, add it to your private route table where your original instance is on (0.0.0.0/0 - instanceid) all the traffic will be routed through the NAT instance.
Here mainly we have to see two things, provided subnet for the elasticloadbalancer is public or private.
Every VPC should have one IGW to connect to the public, every trafic should go through the IGW only. If VPC connected to the IGW, IGW distribute internet to the all instance which are in that VPC, if route table changed to the particular rt, internet traffic can send to only that instance. Here in ELB instance is in service because both are in the same VPC and can communicate each other means checks the status. This IGW will work main role when we are using the NAT.
Always we provide ip range for the IGW or rt as 0.0.0.0/0, it represents as public.
The following link will explain more : http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonVPC/latest/UserGuide/VPC_Scenario2.html
This small explanation might be helpful for someone.
Let me cover your two questions
the AWS loadbalalncer endpoint URL not able to load the page, but the instace status shows in AWS loadbalancer as inService
This is the default behaviour of load balancer , since internally load balancer and your instance may be in the same VPC so they are able to communicate that is why loadbalancer is showing inService status.
Second question Why the IGW is required when loadbalancer is configured over private subnet, it technically Mean it's a public subnet, which is blocking me to create a NAT inatance
You need IGW if you want to access any resources especially EC2 , Loadbalancer from internet. however if you put your load balancer in private subnet it means IGW is not associated with the subnet having loadbalancer in it and hence this load balancer is not accessible outside your VPC that is reason that you were not able to load your page.
NAT instance is usually used when you want your private subnet instances should be able to initiate request over internet and has nothing to do with normal load balancing setup unless and untill you want dont want to install any updates from internet to your instance.
You are trying to access webpage publicly and removing the route entry IGW from the loadbalncer subnet.
The Subnet without IGW will become Private, Hence you can't access it.
First, a subnet with route table that route traffic via the internet gateway (IGW) is a public subnet. An IGW is required because the subnets created in AWS VPC are internal IPs and as internal IPs are not routable via the internet, traffic to and fro EC2 instances that belongs to an internal IP needs a way to complete these request. This is where an IGW comes into play. The IGW allows your EC2 instance to make outbound request to the internet and allows other user/client to make inbound request to your ec2 instance.
A public subnet are group of IPs (called subnets) in your VPC that allows internet traffic to and fro your ec2 instance. A subnet without an Internet gateway is a private subnet. As you already guess no traffic is allowed in or out.
That said, instances in VPC which are in Private subnet still need to initiate an outbound request to the internet to download software or perform update. In this case you have to create and attach a NAT gateway or NAT instance to the private subnet. NAT Gateway and NAT instance only allow outbound traffic to the internet but not the the other way round. In some cases you might want your production EC2 to be in the private subnet and ELB in public subnet for security reason.
ELB usually belong to the public subnet so it reachable from the internet as is your case as well.
TO answer some of your question - when you deleted the IGW from the route table, your ELB automatically becomes a private subnet as such your web page stops loading.
Also, you could still see the ec2 instance behind the ELB as InService even when you deleted the IGW because the ELB and EC2 instance can communicate via the internal IP as they are in same network or VPC.
The ELB needs a route to the internet in order to send you the response over internet.. As simple as that.
Configure your ELB in public subnet, regardless of where your instances are present.
Basically there are two types of load balancers.
1)Internal
2) External
Internal load balancers are those which are launched in a private subnet which will be accessible only internally by the instances on same vpc of the internal elb
External load balancers are which are accessible over the internet which should be launched in a subnet which has internet gateway attached to it and which has route table configured properly to route the requests.
If you attach an internet gateway to a subnet it becomes a public subnet.Also if you create a load-balancer which you need to be accessible from internet it should be a External load balancer and aws will not allow it launch in a private subnet.The instances are showing in service because its communicating internally using private ip-address.