Sandboxing to allow multiple processes open the same portHow can you find out which process is listening on a port on Windows?How to kill a process running on particular port in Linux?SSH tunnel: local => gateway => MySQL serverssh tunnel for local (not remote) command executionCan't connect to Vagrant using HeidiSQL: “Can't connect to MySQL server on 'localhost'”How to find if remote host is reachable over SSH without actually doing sshaccess host's ssh tunnel from docker containerReverse ssh tunnel fails to bind to port when tunnel is torn down and restartedConnecting to remote MongoDB - SSH issuesPort tunnelling from behind firewall to remote server via VNC'd laptop?
Sleepy tired vs physically tired
n-level Ouroboros Quine
Should I warn my boss I might take sick leave?
How do I check that users don't write down their passwords?
Is this standard Japanese employment negotiations, or am I missing something?
What is exact meaning of “ich wäre gern”?
Should I cheat if the majority does it?
Way to see all encrypted fields in Salesforce?
Find max number you can create from an array of numbers
Sci-fi book (no magic, hyperspace jumps, blind protagonist)
Do the 26 richest billionaires own as much wealth as the poorest 3.8 billion people?
How serious is plagiarism in a master’s thesis?
What is the maximum amount of diamond in one Minecraft game?
How would a sea turtle end up on its back?
Do Goblin tokens count as Goblins?
Why is there paternal, for fatherly, fraternal, for brotherly, but no similar word for sons?
Will Jimmy fall off his platform?
How frequently do Russian people still refer to others by their patronymic (отчество)?
Why would "dead languages" be the only languages that spells could be written in?
Is there a way to change the aspect ratio of a DNG file?
How to reclaim personal item I've lent to the office without burning bridges?
How did Einstein know the speed of light was constant?
Clear all code blocks
What is the shape of the upper boundary of water hitting a screen?
Sandboxing to allow multiple processes open the same port
How can you find out which process is listening on a port on Windows?How to kill a process running on particular port in Linux?SSH tunnel: local => gateway => MySQL serverssh tunnel for local (not remote) command executionCan't connect to Vagrant using HeidiSQL: “Can't connect to MySQL server on 'localhost'”How to find if remote host is reachable over SSH without actually doing sshaccess host's ssh tunnel from docker containerReverse ssh tunnel fails to bind to port when tunnel is torn down and restartedConnecting to remote MongoDB - SSH issuesPort tunnelling from behind firewall to remote server via VNC'd laptop?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
Background
I have a command-line application that I use to connect to a remote device on port 1234. I cannot change the port number, and I do not have access to the source to rebuild this tool. I'm currently working in a lab where all ports except SSH are blocked. To get around this, I create a tunnel, i.e.:
ssh -L 1234:remotehost:1234 sshuser@remotehost
Now, I can just point my CLI program at localhost:1234 to connect with my CLI tool to the desired host.
Problem
This CLI tool needs to run for about an hour straight, and I have about 200 remote hosts to test with it. I would like to parallelize this task. Unfortunately, I can only create a single tunnel on my local machine using port 1234.
Question
Is there a (trivial/simple/automated) way to jail/sandbox my CLI tool so that I can launch 100 instances in parallel (i.e. via a shell script) so that each instance "thinks" it's talking to port 1234? For example, does Docker or KVM provide some sort of anonymous/on-demand compute node feature that I could setup rapidly? I'd rather not have to resort to manually deploying and managing a slew of VirtulBox hosts via vagrant.
linux bash networking parallel-processing virtualization
asked Mar 25 at 19:47
DevNullDevNull
12.2k8 gold badges50 silver badges107 bronze badges
add a comment |
Background
I have a command-line application that I use to connect to a remote device on port 1234. I cannot change the port number, and I do not have access to the source to rebuild this tool. I'm currently working in a lab where all ports except SSH are blocked. To get around this, I create a tunnel, i.e.:
ssh -L 1234:remotehost:1234 sshuser@remotehost
Now, I can just point my CLI program at localhost:1234 to connect with my CLI tool to the desired host.
Problem
This CLI tool needs to run for about an hour straight, and I have about 200 remote hosts to test with it. I would like to parallelize this task. Unfortunately, I can only create a single tunnel on my local machine using port 1234.
Question
Is there a (trivial/simple/automated) way to jail/sandbox my CLI tool so that I can launch 100 instances in parallel (i.e. via a shell script) so that each instance "thinks" it's talking to port 1234? For example, does Docker or KVM provide some sort of anonymous/on-demand compute node feature that I could setup rapidly? I'd rather not have to resort to manually deploying and managing a slew of VirtulBox hosts via vagrant.
linux bash networking parallel-processing virtualization
asked Mar 25 at 19:47
DevNullDevNull
12.2k8 gold badges50 silver badges107 bronze badges
add a comment |
Background
I have a command-line application that I use to connect to a remote device on port 1234. I cannot change the port number, and I do not have access to the source to rebuild this tool. I'm currently working in a lab where all ports except SSH are blocked. To get around this, I create a tunnel, i.e.:
ssh -L 1234:remotehost:1234 sshuser@remotehost
Now, I can just point my CLI program at localhost:1234 to connect with my CLI tool to the desired host.
Problem
This CLI tool needs to run for about an hour straight, and I have about 200 remote hosts to test with it. I would like to parallelize this task. Unfortunately, I can only create a single tunnel on my local machine using port 1234.
Question
Is there a (trivial/simple/automated) way to jail/sandbox my CLI tool so that I can launch 100 instances in parallel (i.e. via a shell script) so that each instance "thinks" it's talking to port 1234? For example, does Docker or KVM provide some sort of anonymous/on-demand compute node feature that I could setup rapidly? I'd rather not have to resort to manually deploying and managing a slew of VirtulBox hosts via vagrant.
linux bash networking parallel-processing virtualization
asked Mar 25 at 19:47
DevNullDevNull
12.2k8 gold badges50 silver badges107 bronze badges
Background
I have a command-line application that I use to connect to a remote device on port 1234. I cannot change the port number, and I do not have access to the source to rebuild this tool. I'm currently working in a lab where all ports except SSH are blocked. To get around this, I create a tunnel, i.e.:
ssh -L 1234:remotehost:1234 sshuser@remotehost
Now, I can just point my CLI program at localhost:1234 to connect with my CLI tool to the desired host.
Problem
This CLI tool needs to run for about an hour straight, and I have about 200 remote hosts to test with it. I would like to parallelize this task. Unfortunately, I can only create a single tunnel on my local machine using port 1234.
Question
Is there a (trivial/simple/automated) way to jail/sandbox my CLI tool so that I can launch 100 instances in parallel (i.e. via a shell script) so that each instance "thinks" it's talking to port 1234? For example, does Docker or KVM provide some sort of anonymous/on-demand compute node feature that I could setup rapidly? I'd rather not have to resort to manually deploying and managing a slew of VirtulBox hosts via vagrant.
linux bash networking parallel-processing virtualization
linux bash networking parallel-processing virtualization
asked Mar 25 at 19:47
DevNullDevNull
12.2k8 gold badges50 silver badges107 bronze badges
asked Mar 25 at 19:47
DevNullDevNull
12.2k8 gold badges50 silver badges107 bronze badges
asked Mar 25 at 19:47
DevNullDevNull
12.2k8 gold badges50 silver badges107 bronze badges
asked Mar 25 at 19:47
DevNullDevNull
12.2k8 gold badges50 silver badges107 bronze badges
asked Mar 25 at 19:47
DevNullDevNull
12.2k8 gold badges50 silver badges107 bronze badges
12.2k8 gold badges50 silver badges107 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
The simple answer is that you can use multiple IP addresses locally. Each local IP address on the client will allow you to create another tunnel. Currently, you are using localhost. But your client also has an IP address. You can prove my point by trying this syntax:
ssh -f -N -L 127.0.0.1:1234:remotehost1:1234 sshuser@remotehost1 # this is default
ssh -f -N -L <local-IP1>:1234:remotehost2:1234 sshuser@remotehost2 # specifying non-default value <local-IP1>
Now, you just need to figure out how to give your client multiple IP addresses (secondary addresses). Then you can expand this beyond 2 parallel sessions.
I've also added -f and -N to your ssh syntax to put ssh into the background (-f) and to not issue any commands.
Using -R tunnels in the past, I've found that I need to enable GatewayPorts on the server (/etc/ssh/sshd_config). In the case of -L , I don't see the need. However, the ssh man-page explicitly mentioned GatewayPorts associated with the -L function. You may need to play around a bit. I just tried this out on my Mac and I was able to get it going without any GatewayPorts considerations.
answered Mar 25 at 20:03
MarkMark
1,3361 gold badge8 silver badges13 bronze badges
1
Beautifully simple. Can't believe I overlooked this. Thanks!
– DevNull
Mar 25 at 20:17
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55345363%2fsandboxing-to-allow-multiple-processes-open-the-same-port%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The simple answer is that you can use multiple IP addresses locally. Each local IP address on the client will allow you to create another tunnel. Currently, you are using localhost. But your client also has an IP address. You can prove my point by trying this syntax:
ssh -f -N -L 127.0.0.1:1234:remotehost1:1234 sshuser@remotehost1 # this is default
ssh -f -N -L <local-IP1>:1234:remotehost2:1234 sshuser@remotehost2 # specifying non-default value <local-IP1>
Now, you just need to figure out how to give your client multiple IP addresses (secondary addresses). Then you can expand this beyond 2 parallel sessions.
I've also added -f and -N to your ssh syntax to put ssh into the background (-f) and to not issue any commands.
Using -R tunnels in the past, I've found that I need to enable GatewayPorts on the server (/etc/ssh/sshd_config). In the case of -L , I don't see the need. However, the ssh man-page explicitly mentioned GatewayPorts associated with the -L function. You may need to play around a bit. I just tried this out on my Mac and I was able to get it going without any GatewayPorts considerations.
answered Mar 25 at 20:03
MarkMark
1,3361 gold badge8 silver badges13 bronze badges
1
Beautifully simple. Can't believe I overlooked this. Thanks!
– DevNull
Mar 25 at 20:17
add a comment |
The simple answer is that you can use multiple IP addresses locally. Each local IP address on the client will allow you to create another tunnel. Currently, you are using localhost. But your client also has an IP address. You can prove my point by trying this syntax:
ssh -f -N -L 127.0.0.1:1234:remotehost1:1234 sshuser@remotehost1 # this is default
ssh -f -N -L <local-IP1>:1234:remotehost2:1234 sshuser@remotehost2 # specifying non-default value <local-IP1>
Now, you just need to figure out how to give your client multiple IP addresses (secondary addresses). Then you can expand this beyond 2 parallel sessions.
I've also added -f and -N to your ssh syntax to put ssh into the background (-f) and to not issue any commands.
Using -R tunnels in the past, I've found that I need to enable GatewayPorts on the server (/etc/ssh/sshd_config). In the case of -L , I don't see the need. However, the ssh man-page explicitly mentioned GatewayPorts associated with the -L function. You may need to play around a bit. I just tried this out on my Mac and I was able to get it going without any GatewayPorts considerations.
answered Mar 25 at 20:03
MarkMark
1,3361 gold badge8 silver badges13 bronze badges
1
Beautifully simple. Can't believe I overlooked this. Thanks!
– DevNull
Mar 25 at 20:17
add a comment |
The simple answer is that you can use multiple IP addresses locally. Each local IP address on the client will allow you to create another tunnel. Currently, you are using localhost. But your client also has an IP address. You can prove my point by trying this syntax:
ssh -f -N -L 127.0.0.1:1234:remotehost1:1234 sshuser@remotehost1 # this is default
ssh -f -N -L <local-IP1>:1234:remotehost2:1234 sshuser@remotehost2 # specifying non-default value <local-IP1>
Now, you just need to figure out how to give your client multiple IP addresses (secondary addresses). Then you can expand this beyond 2 parallel sessions.
I've also added -f and -N to your ssh syntax to put ssh into the background (-f) and to not issue any commands.
Using -R tunnels in the past, I've found that I need to enable GatewayPorts on the server (/etc/ssh/sshd_config). In the case of -L , I don't see the need. However, the ssh man-page explicitly mentioned GatewayPorts associated with the -L function. You may need to play around a bit. I just tried this out on my Mac and I was able to get it going without any GatewayPorts considerations.
answered Mar 25 at 20:03
MarkMark
1,3361 gold badge8 silver badges13 bronze badges
The simple answer is that you can use multiple IP addresses locally. Each local IP address on the client will allow you to create another tunnel. Currently, you are using localhost. But your client also has an IP address. You can prove my point by trying this syntax:
ssh -f -N -L 127.0.0.1:1234:remotehost1:1234 sshuser@remotehost1 # this is default
ssh -f -N -L <local-IP1>:1234:remotehost2:1234 sshuser@remotehost2 # specifying non-default value <local-IP1>
Now, you just need to figure out how to give your client multiple IP addresses (secondary addresses). Then you can expand this beyond 2 parallel sessions.
I've also added -f and -N to your ssh syntax to put ssh into the background (-f) and to not issue any commands.
Using -R tunnels in the past, I've found that I need to enable GatewayPorts on the server (/etc/ssh/sshd_config). In the case of -L , I don't see the need. However, the ssh man-page explicitly mentioned GatewayPorts associated with the -L function. You may need to play around a bit. I just tried this out on my Mac and I was able to get it going without any GatewayPorts considerations.
answered Mar 25 at 20:03
MarkMark
1,3361 gold badge8 silver badges13 bronze badges
edited Mar 25 at 20:20
answered Mar 25 at 20:03
MarkMark
1,3361 gold badge8 silver badges13 bronze badges
answered Mar 25 at 20:03
MarkMark
1,3361 gold badge8 silver badges13 bronze badges
answered Mar 25 at 20:03
MarkMark
1,3361 gold badge8 silver badges13 bronze badges
1,3361 gold badge8 silver badges13 bronze badges
1
Beautifully simple. Can't believe I overlooked this. Thanks!
– DevNull
Mar 25 at 20:17
add a comment |
1
Beautifully simple. Can't believe I overlooked this. Thanks!
– DevNull
Mar 25 at 20:17
1
1
Beautifully simple. Can't believe I overlooked this. Thanks!
– DevNull
Mar 25 at 20:17
Beautifully simple. Can't believe I overlooked this. Thanks!
– DevNull
Mar 25 at 20:17
add a comment |
Got a question that you can’t ask on public Stack Overflow? Learn more about sharing private information with Stack Overflow for Teams.
Got a question that you can’t ask on public Stack Overflow? Learn more about sharing private information with Stack Overflow for Teams.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55345363%2fsandboxing-to-allow-multiple-processes-open-the-same-port%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
