Isolated dnsmasq Setup
-
@george1421 Thank you for the information George.
So if I want to run Ubuntu Server 20.04, that would require the dev branch? Good to know, I was going to use that but wasn’t sure of compatibility so I went with 18.04.
So far the steps you’ve described are what I’ve done. I have the FOG server set up with 2 interfaces, I set up a 10.0.0.0/8 network on the Ethernet interface.
The USB interface on our business LAN I used DHCP, I can’t assign a static without contacting our MSP.
When I installed FOG I changed the interface and issued it a 10.0.0.1 address. But here’s where I ran into trouble. I don’t know what I was doing wrong but whenever I told it to use FOG for DHCP the install would fail at “Setting up and starting DCHP Server”. It would create the dhcpd.conf file though.
Looking back now, would a DNS setting, or lack of, fail the DCHP install? I didn’t realize that 127.0.0.53 was Ubuntu’s default DNS and I think I changed that to the FOG IP on those installs. It wasn’t until I was messing with dnsmasq that I figured that out.
So anyway, that is how I got into using dnsmasq instead of the isc-dhcp server. I can try another install this way and see how I fair.
-
Update:
Installed Ubuntu Server 20.04 with the dev branch. I still got an error with starting the dhcp though. Digging through the forums I found it was my /8 mask that was causing it to fail. I changed it to /24 and everything installed flawlessly and I’m able to get to the ipxe menu.
I’ve always had it stuck in my head that a 10.0.0.0 network was a 255.0.0.0 mask and forgot what that actually meant. I do not need 16 million hosts.
That is indeed what broke the install, there was a thread here that helped me figure it out.
-
@mwilcox said in Isolated dnsmasq Setup:
That is indeed what broke the install, there was a thread here that helped me figure it out.
So I’m not sure if this is considered a bug, or the system telling you; hey guy do you really want to do this??
So now you have your FOG server spanning both networks and a dedicated imaging network setup. And on that imaging network you can pxe boot into the iPXE menu?
Understand that dedicated imaging network subnet range shall not be used anywhere else in your network. If it is then pick a new range.
-
It’s a good precaution either way!
Yes, I’m able to boot into the iPXE menu on the 10.0.0.1 network. We only have the one network so we’re good there.
-
@george1421 So would it be possible to PXE boot on the imaging network, and after imaging allow the PC to boot to the business network if it is not PXE booting? After imaging they install drivers and activate Windows, then shut it down to OOBE and we ship it out. It would be nice if they didn’t have to plug into a different switch.
-
@mwilcox While its not a supported configuration, if your FOG server spans both networks the FOG server can act as a router too.
The setup is pretty simple, on your business network default router you just describe the imaging network and its accessible via the Business network interface of the FOG server.
On the imaging network side, just ensure that the FOG server imaging network interface is configured as the default router.
Then a quick kernel parameter change and your FOG server will be a router.
-
@george1421 Thanks George.
What exactly needs to happen on the business network side? Access for me might be limited there. I’m not quite following the details.
-
@mwilcox The ONLY thing you need to do on the business side is provide a static route on your default route for the business network back to your imaging network. That way when you have packets destined for the 10.0.0.0/24 network and that packet exists on the business network the devices know to send it via the business network interface of the FOG server.
IF you can’t modify the business network at all, then we will need to configure the fog server to do NAT between the imaging network and the business network. You will do that with iptables and mangle (I think).
-
@george1421 I will check with our MSP and see if that’s an option, I’ll also test out your link.
My FOG server is running in VirtualBox, do you know if I can change that interface to NAT? I’ve always read not to use NAT for PXE booting. I did have it on once and it issues the server a 10.0.2.15 address I think and I can still access the internet. I didn’t install FOG that way though. I’ll try and test it out just wondering if you knew of the top of your head.
Thanks again.
-
@mwilcox said in Isolated dnsmasq Setup:
My FOG server is running in VirtualBox, do you know if I can change that interface to NAT? I’ve always read not to use NAT for PXE booting.
Ok what you need to do is isolate the FOG Imaging bits from the fog server acting as a router. Two different functions that are not connected.
Normally a linux server with multiple interfaces will not send packets between its interfaces. You can turn on that kernel parameter and it will “act” like a router. For this to work you need to know how to get packets on and off your network. That is why you need to create an static route on your business network so your business network knows how to send data back to the imaging network (such as in windows activation)
So what I’m suggesting is to enable in the linux kernel to act as a NAT router when sending packets between the imaging network and the business LAN. FOG Imaging does not do/use/work by sending packets between the interfaces. SO there will be NO impact to fog imaging or how you have things setup in virtualbox because the NAT is happening inside the linux kernel. With NAT turned on inside the FOG sever’s host OS linux kernel all traffic on the business network will actually look like its coming from the FOG server, when in fact the traffic could be coming from the imaging network clients reaching out to the business network.
-
@mwilcox Just a quick hint on this from my side. As far as I see you have two physical network interfaces and FOG running in VirtualBox, right? Don’t confuse VirtualBox’s NAT setting with the NAT George proposed to enable in the FOG Server!! I reckon you need to set both VirtualBox network interfaces to Bridge Mode so they act as much physical interfaces as possible. Then look into the NAT stuff in the FOG Linux OS…
-
@Sebastian-Roth Thanks Sebastian, that’s what I was wondering, I won’t bother with NAT in VirtualBox then. Hopefully I will have time tomorrow to try and get this set up and tested.
Yes, I do have two physical network interfaces. The machine is a Lenovo M92 with one network port. I’m using that for the imaging network and attached a USB to ethernet adapter for the business network. They are both in bridged mode.
