201 · Question #313
A virtual server is listening at 10.10.1.100:any and has the following iRule associated with it: when CLIENT_ACCEPTED { if {[TCP::local_port] equals 80 } { pool pool1 } elseif {[TCP::local_port]…
The correct answer is D. Unknown. The pool cannot be determined from the information provided. The iRule explicitly defines pool selection only for connections to ports 80 and 443; for a connection to port 22, the iRule does not specify a pool, and no default pool is provided.
Question
A virtual server is listening at 10.10.1.100:any and has the following iRule associated with it: when CLIENT_ACCEPTED { if {[TCP::local_port] equals 80 } { pool pool1 } elseif {[TCP::local_port] equals 443} { pool pool2 } If a user connects to 10.10.1.100 and port 22, which pool will receive the request?
Options
- Apool1
- Bpool2
- CNone. The request will be dropped.
- DUnknown. The pool cannot be determined from the information provided.
How the community answered
(27 responses)- A11% (3)
- B4% (1)
- C4% (1)
- D81% (22)
Why each option
The iRule explicitly defines pool selection only for connections to ports 80 and 443; for a connection to port 22, the iRule does not specify a pool, and no default pool is provided.
`pool1` is selected only if the `TCP::local_port` is 80, which is not the case in the scenario.
`pool2` is selected only if the `TCP::local_port` is 443, which is not the case in the scenario.
While a connection might be dropped if no pool is selected, the question asks which pool will receive the request, and the primary issue is that a pool cannot be determined from the provided information.
The provided iRule explicitly selects `pool1` when the local port is 80 and `pool2` when it is 443; since the user connects to port 22, neither condition is met, and no default pool is specified for the virtual server to handle such a request.
Concept tested: BIG-IP iRule logic and pool selection
Source: https://techdocs.f5.com/en-us/big-ip-15-0-0/big-ip-irules-reference/tcp.html
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.