Willy Tarreau | 640cf22 | 2010-10-29 21:46:16 +0200 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | The PROXY protocol - 2010/10/29 - Willy TARREAU |
| 2 | ----------------------------------------------- |
| 3 | |
| 4 | Relaying TCP connections through proxies generally involves a loss of the |
| 5 | original TCP connection parameters such as source and destination addresses, |
| 6 | ports, and so on. Some protocols make it a little bit easier to transfer such |
| 7 | information. For SMTP, Postfix authors have proposed the XCLIENT protocol which |
| 8 | received broad adoption and is particularly suited to mail exchanges. In HTTP, |
| 9 | we have the non-standard but omnipresent X-Forwarded-For header which relays |
| 10 | information about the original source address, and the less common |
| 11 | X-Original-To which relays information about the destination address. |
| 12 | |
| 13 | However, both mechanisms require a knowledge of the underlying protocol to be |
| 14 | implemented in intermediaries. |
| 15 | |
| 16 | Then comes a new class of products which we'll call "dumb proxies", not because |
| 17 | they don't do anything, but because they're processing protocol-agnostic data. |
| 18 | Stunnel is an example of such a "dumb proxy". It talks raw TCP on one side, and |
| 19 | raw SSL on the other one, and does that reliably. |
| 20 | |
| 21 | The problem with such a proxy when it is combined with another one such as |
| 22 | haproxy is to adapt it to talk the higher level protocol. A patch is available |
| 23 | for Stunnel to make it capable to insert an X-Forwarded-For header in the first |
| 24 | HTTP request of each incoming connection. Haproxy is able not to add another |
| 25 | one when the connection comes from Stunnel, so that it's possible to hide it |
| 26 | from the servers. |
| 27 | |
| 28 | The typical architecture becomes the following one : |
| 29 | |
| 30 | |
| 31 | +--------+ HTTP :80 +----------+ |
| 32 | | client | --------------------------------> | | |
| 33 | | | | haproxy, | |
| 34 | +--------+ +---------+ | 1 or 2 | |
| 35 | / / HTTPS | stunnel | HTTP :81 | listening| |
| 36 | <________/ ---------> | (server | ---------> | ports | |
| 37 | | mode) | | | |
| 38 | +---------+ +----------+ |
| 39 | |
| 40 | |
| 41 | The problem appears when haproxy runs with keep-alive on the side towards the |
| 42 | client. The Stunnel patch will only add the X-Forwarded-For header to the first |
| 43 | request of each connection and all subsequent requests will not have it. One |
| 44 | solution could be to improve the patch to make it support keep-alive and parse |
| 45 | all forwarded data, whether they're announced with a Content-Length or with a |
| 46 | Transfer-Encoding, taking care of special methods such as HEAD which announce |
| 47 | data without transfering them, etc... In fact, it would require implementing a |
| 48 | full HTTP stack in Stunnel. It would then become a lot more complex, a lot less |
| 49 | reliable and would not anymore be the "dumb proxy" that fits every purposes. |
| 50 | |
| 51 | In practice, we don't need to add a header for each request because we'll emit |
| 52 | the exact same information every time : the information related to the client |
| 53 | side connection. We could then cache that information in haproxy and use it for |
| 54 | every other request. But that becomes dangerous and is still limited to HTTP |
| 55 | only. |
| 56 | |
| 57 | Another approach would be to prepend each connection with a line reporting the |
| 58 | characteristics of the other side's connection. This method is a lot simpler to |
| 59 | implement, does not require any protocol-specific knowledge on either side, and |
| 60 | completely fits the purpose. That's finally what we did with a small patch to |
| 61 | Stunnel and another one to haproxy. We have called this protocol the PROXY |
| 62 | protocol. |
| 63 | |
| 64 | The PROXY protocol's goal is to fill the receiver's internal structures with |
| 65 | the information it could have found itself if it performed the accept from the |
| 66 | client. Thus right now we're supporting the following : |
| 67 | - INET protocol and family (TCP over IPv4 or IPv6) |
| 68 | - layer 3 source and destination addresses |
| 69 | - layer 4 source and destination ports if any |
| 70 | |
| 71 | Unlike the XCLIENT protocol, the PROXY protocol was designed with limited |
| 72 | extensibility in order to help the receiver parse it very fast, while keeping |
| 73 | it human-readable for better debugging possibilities. So it consists in exactly |
| 74 | the following block prepended before any data flowing from the dumb proxy to |
| 75 | the next hop : |
| 76 | |
| 77 | - a string identifying the protocol : "PROXY" ( \x50 \x52 \x4F \x58 \x59 ) |
| 78 | |
| 79 | - exactly one space : " " ( \x20 ) |
| 80 | |
| 81 | - a string indicating the proxied INET protocol and family. At the moment, |
| 82 | only "TCP4" ( \x54 \x43 \x50 \x34 ) for TCP over IPv4, and "TCP6" |
| 83 | ( \x54 \x43 \x50 \x36 ) for TCP over IPv6 are allowed. Unsupported or |
| 84 | unknown protocols must be reported with the name "UNKNOWN" ( \x55 \x4E \x4B |
| 85 | \x4E \x4F \x57 \x4E). The remaining fields of the line are then optional |
| 86 | and may be ignored, until the CRLF is found. |
| 87 | |
| 88 | - exactly one space : " " ( \x20 ) |
| 89 | |
| 90 | - the layer 3 source address in its canonical format. IPv4 addresses must be |
| 91 | indicated as a series of exactly 4 integers in the range [0..255] inclusive |
| 92 | written in decimal representation separated by exactly one dot between each |
| 93 | other. Heading zeroes are not permitted in front of numbers in order to |
| 94 | avoid any possible confusion with octal numbers. IPv6 addresses must be |
| 95 | indicated as series of 4 hexadecimal digits (upper or lower case) delimited |
| 96 | by colons between each other, with the acceptance of one double colon |
| 97 | sequence to replace the largest acceptable range of consecutive zeroes. The |
| 98 | total number of decoded bits must exactly be 128. The advertised protocol |
| 99 | family dictates what format to use. |
| 100 | |
| 101 | - exactly one space : " " ( \x20 ) |
| 102 | |
| 103 | - the layer 3 destination address in its canonical format. It is the same |
| 104 | format as the layer 3 source address and matches the same family. |
| 105 | |
| 106 | - exactly one space : " " ( \x20 ) |
| 107 | |
| 108 | - the TCP source port represented as a decimal integer in the range |
| 109 | [0..65535] inclusive. Heading zeroes are not permitted in front of numbers |
| 110 | in order to avoid any possible confusion with octal numbers. |
| 111 | |
| 112 | - exactly one space : " " ( \x20 ) |
| 113 | |
| 114 | - the TCP destination port represented as a decimal integer in the range |
| 115 | [0..65535] inclusive. Heading zeroes are not permitted in front of numbers |
| 116 | in order to avoid any possible confusion with octal numbers. |
| 117 | |
| 118 | - the CRLF sequence ( \x0D \x0A ) |
| 119 | |
| 120 | The receiver MUST be configured to only receive this protocol and MUST not try |
| 121 | to guess whether the line is prepended or not. That means that the protocol |
| 122 | explicitly prevents port sharing between public and private access. Otherwise |
| 123 | it would become a big security issue. The receiver should ensure proper access |
| 124 | filtering so that only trusted proxies are allowed to use this protocol. The |
| 125 | receiver must wait for the CRLF sequence to decode the addresses in order to |
| 126 | ensure they are complete. Any sequence which does not exactly match the |
| 127 | protocol must be discarded and cause a connection abort. It is recommended |
| 128 | to abort the connection as soon as possible to that the emitter notices the |
| 129 | anomaly. |
| 130 | |
| 131 | If the announced transport protocol is "UNKNOWN", then the receiver knows that |
| 132 | the emitter talks the correct protocol, any may or may not decide to accept the |
| 133 | connection and use the real connection's parameters as if there was no such |
| 134 | protocol on the wire. |
| 135 | |
| 136 | An example of such a line before an HTTP request would look like this (CR |
| 137 | marked as "\r" and LF marked as "\n") : |
| 138 | |
| 139 | PROXY TCP4 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.11 56324 443\r\n |
| 140 | GET / HTTP/1.1\r\n |
| 141 | Host: 192.168.0.11\r\n |
| 142 | \r\n |
| 143 | |
| 144 | For the emitter, the line is easy to put into the output buffers once the |
| 145 | connection is established. For the receiver, once the line is parsed, it's |
| 146 | easy to skip it from the input buffers. |
| 147 | |
| 148 | We have a patch available for recent versions of Stunnel that brings it the |
Willy Tarreau | cf3e47a | 2011-02-13 09:17:39 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 149 | ability to be an emitter. The feature is called "sendproxy" there. The code |
Willy Tarreau | 640cf22 | 2010-10-29 21:46:16 +0200 | [diff] [blame] | 150 | for the receiving side has been merged into haproxy and is enabled using the |
| 151 | "accept-proxy" keyword on a "bind" statement. Haproxy will use the transport |
| 152 | information from the PROXY protocol for logging, ACLs, etc... everywhere an |
| 153 | information about the original connection is required. |
| 154 | |
| 155 | It is possible that the protocol may slightly evolve to present other |
| 156 | information such as the incoming network interface, or the origin addresses in |
| 157 | case of network address translation happening before the first proxy, but this |
| 158 | is not identified as a requirement right now. |
| 159 | -- |