I was able to get onDomain working, but someone in the Slack channel stated that onDomain is deprecated for Traefik, though there is no mention of deprecation in the Traefik documentation.
[edit]
There is a reference to this deprecation here: https://github.com/containous/traefik/issues/2212
I am using the Consul catalog backend with host rules for my services, being set with tags:
ex:
{
"service": {
"name": "application-java",
"tags": ["application-java", "env-SUBDOMAIN", "traefik.tags=loadbalanced", "traefik.frontend.rule=Host:SUBDOMAIN.domain.com"],
"address": "",
"port": 8080,
"enable_tag_override": false,
"checks": [{
"http": "http://localhost:8080/api/health",
"interval": "10s"
}]
}
}
However, no certificate is generated for SUBDOMAIN.domain.com - requests just use the TRAEFIK DEFAULT CERT.
What is the recommended method for getting Traefik to generate certificates for Consul catalog services automatically?
It looks like this might only work with the frontEndRule option in the main config, rather than with the "traefik.frontend.rule" override tag.
I added this line:
frontEndRule = "Host:{{getTag \"traefik.subdomain\" .Attributes
.ServiceName }}.{{.Domain}}"
and this Consul catalog tag:
traefik.subdomain=SUBDOMAIN
and I'm getting the Fake certificate from the LE staging server now.
Related
I'm trying to deploy a spring boot project to azure using docker containers.
If I do az container logs --name ... --resource-group ... I see
Tomcat started on port(s): 80 (http) with context path ''
az container show --name ... --resource-group ...
"ipAddress": {
"dnsNameLabel": "X",
"dnsNameLabelReusePolicy": "Unsecure",
"fqdn": "X.centralus.azurecontainer.io",
"ip": "Y",
"ports": [
{
"port": 80,
"protocol": "TCP"
}
],
"type": "Public"
},
Now if I go to X.centralus.azurecontainer.io I only see 404 page not found and don't see any request being made in the logs for the spring container (have logs set to debug to see if it serves anything)
On the azure portal it also confirms that my container is in state "Running"
For what reasons does "page not found" show instead of just forwarding to the container on the same port? Anyone know what could be wrong here?
• I would highly recommend you to please refer to the below Microsoft documentation links for troubleshooting common Azure Spring cloud application deployment issues and in general issues faced while deploying an Azure Container Instance. As they are quite helpful in resolving the common issues faced by users regarding Azure Container Instances.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/container-instances/container-instances-troubleshooting
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/spring-cloud/troubleshoot
I've set up a redbird based proxy following its README file examples.
By now I've configured single domain both for http and https and it's working well (https still using self-signed certificate).
But now I'm trying to configure it to use letsencrypt to automatically get valid ssl certificates and I'm getting stuck in following error:
{"level":30,"time":1578681102208,"pid":21320,"hostname":"nigul","name":"redbird","0":false,"1":"setChallenge called for 'exposito.bitifet.net'","msg":"Lets encrypt debugger","v":1}
[acme-v2] handled(?) rejection as errback:
Error: Error: Failed HTTP-01 Pre-Flight / Dry Run.
curl 'http://exposito.bitifet.net/.well-known/acme-challenge/test-cf55199519d859042f695e620cca8dbb-0'
Expected: 'test-cf55199519d859042f695e620cca8dbb-0.MgLl7GIS59DPtPMejuUcXfddzNt8YxfLVo5op670u8M'
Got: '<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
<title>404 - Not Found</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>404 - Not Found</h1>
</body>
</html>
'
See https://git.coolaj86.com/coolaj86/acme-v2.js/issues/4
at /home/joanmi/SERVICES/redbird_domains/node_modules/acme-v2/index.js:49:10
at process._tickCallback (internal/process/next_tick.js:68:7)
As far as I understand, this is telling me that Lets Encrypt is trying to access to the url http://exposito.bitifet.net/.well-known/acme-challenge/test-cf55199519d859042f695e620cca8dbb-0 using the following command:
curl 'http://exposito.bitifet.net/.well-known/acme-challenge/test-cf55199519d859042f695e620cca8dbb-0'
...and that it is getting which seems a 404 HTML Error page which I have no clue wherever it could come.
And, in fact, executing that curl command or just pasting that url in my browser (you can try it: I left the server running), I get the given Expected string so, from my point of view it seems like if my configuration were correct but, for some reason, Lets Encrypt's servers were reaching another server (either because of wrong routing or DNS).
But on the other hand, I suppose it's more probable that I've done something wrong in my configuration.
Here I paste my whole script (ports 80 and 443 are redirected to 1080 and 1443, respectively, through iptables because the script is run by non privileged user):
const Redbird = require("redbird");
const proxy = Redbird({
port: 1080,
xfwd: false, // Disable the X-Forwarded-For header
letsencrypt: {
path: __dirname + '/certs',
port: 9999
// LetsEncrypt minimal web server port for handling challenges.
// Routed 80->9999, no need to open 9999 in firewall. Default 3000
// if not defined.
},
ssl: {
http2: true,
port: 1443, // SSL port used to serve registered https routes with LetsEncrypt certificate.
}
});
proxy.register('exposito.bitifet.net:9999', 'http://localhost:8001', {
ssl: {
letsencrypt: {
email: 'xxxxxx#gmail.com', // Domain owner/admin email
production: false,
// WARNING: Only use this flag when the proxy is verified to
// work correctly to avoid being banned!
}
}
});
proxy.register("exposito.bitifet.net", "http://localhost:8001");
Any clue will be welcome.
Thanks.
SOLVED!!
Many issues were involved at the same time (despite my lack of experience with either redbird and letsencrypt.
The magic 404/Not found page: I guess it came from a lighttpd server that seems to had been preinstalled in my VPS.
Port 80 was redirected via iptables but I suppose in one or other configuration tweak I could have redirected incoming requests to localhost's port 80 (which is not redirected).
My redbird missunderstanding: Looking at examples in its README file, I thought redbird were kinda "multi- reverse_proxy" in the sense that you could redirect http and https requests with single redbird instance.
But I finally realized that the (maybe not so well named) port option which is, in fact, an http port, serves only to configure a built-in unconditional http->https redirector (of which I already had read about, but I thought it were optional).
The actual underlying issue: If your DNS have DNSSEC activated, you should define a CAA register in it pointing to letsencrypt.org.
At the moment I disabled DNSSEC instead because my provider's control panel doesn't allow me to create such register.
I discovered it while trying to get the certificates through certbot (sudo apt-get install certbot which I must say that, If I had known about it before, I wouldn't had care about trying redbird's letsencrypt integration.
It is much more verbose (while redbird is more like a black box when errors arise) and pointed out that I needed the CAA register.
Here the notes I took about it (in case anyone could be interested):
Free SSL Certificates with Certbot
Install certbot:
sudo apt-get install certbot
Create:
sudo certbot certonly --manual --preferred-challenges http -d <domain>
Renew:
sudo certbot renew
Caveats:
DNSSEC
If your DNS server has DNSSEC enabled, you will need to add a CAA
register pointing to letsencrypt.org.
...and your DNS provider my not allow to create it (at least I
couldn't with CDMON. Also not -yet- complained).
production = false is for other kinds of testing: I read that if you put in to true while testing, you may be banned from letsencrypt if you perform too many requests.
Setting it to false you can test redirections, but you will see still errors regarding letsencrypt even you could navigate without a secure certificate (I think kinda self-signed is provided to allow testing). So don't expect a valid one.
ssl port is used for redirection: Not a (big) issue, but if you specify ssl port other than 443, built in redirector will unconditionally redirect you to that port.
Running redbird as root and using standard (80 and 443) ports works fine. But if you, like me, want to use an alternative ports in order to execute redbird with non privileged user, you will get redirected to that alternative port instead of 443 (Even having it redirected through iptables).
Here my (almost*) final redbird script:
const Redbird = require("redbird");
const proxy = Redbird({
port: 1080,
xfwd: false, // Disable the X-Forwarded-For header
ssl: {
port: 1443,
},
letsencrypt: {
path: __dirname + '/certs',
port: 9999,
// LetsEncrypt minimal web server port for handling challenges.
// Routed 80->9999, no need to open 9999 in firewall. Default 3000
// if not defined.
},
});
proxy.register('exposito.bitifet.net', 'http://exposito.bitifet.net:8001', {
ssl: {
http2: true,
letsencrypt: {
email: 'xxxxxx#gmail.com', // Domain owner/admin email
production: true,
// WARNING: Only use this flag when the proxy is verified to
// work correctly to avoid being banned!
},
}
});
(*) I still need to fix the explicit-port redirection issue (5), because I don't want to run redbird as root. But I know is possible to allow uses to listen given ports. Even I would probably better try to patch redbird in order to allow specifying listen and redirection ports separatedly.
EDIT: It is already implemented (and documented) using the (optional) option redirectPort in ssl section. Just added redirectPort: 443 and job done!!
EDIT 2: For the sake of completion, there still was another issue I struggled with.
To get things working I finally configured the redirection to the http port instead of https one.
That is: Incomming https requests gets redirected to my application http port.
It seems weird but it works. At least if you don't need any exclusively https feature such as push notifications (which I plan to use in the future).
But its implies to open an http server at least on localhost. Which isn't a major issue now (this is only a playground server) but I plan to use redbird at work to proxy multiple domains to different servers so that would had forced us to open http at least in our DMZ vlan (which is an additional risk that is better to avoid...).
When I tried redirecting to https I got the DEPTH_ZERO_SELF_SIGNED_CERT error.
Ok: This is telling me that redbird (or node) does not trust my original (self signed) certificate. I know there is an option to tell node to accept those certificates. But maybe it is not the way to go...
So I configured my application to use the same certificate that redbird is obtaining through letsencrypt.
But then I got this other error:
UNABLE_TO_VERIFY_LEAF_SIGNATURE
Researching a bit I found this StackOverflow answer that explains how to get all root and intermediate certificates trusted by Mozilla and make node to trust them.
So, at the end, what I did was:
Installed node_extra_ca_certs_mozilla_bundle package:
npm install --save node_extra_ca_certs_mozilla_bundle
Prepended NODE_EXTRA_CA_CERTS=node_modules/node_extra_ca_certs_mozilla_bundle/ca_bundle/ca_intermediate_root_bundle.pem to the start command in the package.json's scripts section.
Updated my redbird script to point again to the https (protocol and) port:
proxy.register('exposito.bitifet.net', 'https://localhost:4301', {...]);
Here my final redbird configuration:
const Redbird = require("redbird");
const proxy = Redbird({
port: 1080,
xfwd: false, // Disable the X-Forwarded-For header
ssl: {
port: 1443,
redirectPort: 443
// key: "/etc/bitifet/exposito/ssl/private.key",
// cert: "/etc/bitifet/exposito/ssl/public.cert",
},
letsencrypt: {
path: __dirname + '/certs',
port: 9999,
// LetsEncrypt minimal web server port for handling challenges.
// Routed 80->9999, no need to open 9999 in firewall. Default 3000
// if not defined.
},
});
proxy.register('exposito.bitifet.net', 'https://localhost:4301', {
ssl: {
http2: true,
letsencrypt: {
email: 'xxxxxx#gmail.com', // Domain owner/admin email
production: true,
// WARNING: Only use this flag when the proxy is verified to
// work correctly to avoid being banned!
},
}
});
And here my package.json file contents:
{
"name": "redbird_domains",
"version": "0.0.1",
"description": "Local Domains Handling",
"main": "index.js",
"scripts": {
"test": "echo \"Error: no test specified\" && exit 1",
"start": "NODE_EXTRA_CA_CERTS=node_modules/node_extra_ca_certs_mozilla_bundle/ca_bundle/ca_intermediate_root_bundle.pem node ./index.js"
},
"author": "Joanmi",
"license": "GPL-3.0",
"dependencies": {
"node_extra_ca_certs_mozilla_bundle": "^1.0.4",
"redbird": "^0.10.0"
}
}
When I make request for this started server: https://gist.github.com/Rasarts/1180479de480d7e36d6d7aef08babe59#file-server
I get right response:
{
"args": {},
"headers": {
"Accept-Encoding": "gzip",
"Connection": "close",
"Host": "httpbin.org",
"User-Agent": "Go-http-client/1.1"
},
"origin": "",
"url": "https://httpbin.org/get"
}
But when I make request to that server on minikube which was created this way:
https://gist.github.com/Rasarts/1180479de480d7e36d6d7aef08babe59#file-serve-yaml
I get error:
ERROR: Get https://httpbin.org/get: EOF<nil>
How can I make http requests from kubernetes pod?
Knative uses Istio and Istio, by default, doesn't allow outbound traffic to external hosts, such as httpbin.org. That's why your request is failing.
Follow this document to learn how to configure Knative (so that it configures Istio correctly) to make outbound connections. Or, you can directly configure the Istio by adding an egress policy: https://istio.io/docs/tasks/traffic-management/egress/
I am working on launching Consul containers on docker with Marathon and I've run into a somewhat subjective issue regarding creating the JSON files.
Currently I plan to launch containers with JSON files of this format
server-1.json
{
"id": "consul-server-2",
"cmd": "consul agent -server -client=0.0.0.0 -ui -bind=100.10.30.40 -retry-join=server-1.local -data-dir=/tmp/consul",
"cpus": 1,
"mem": 512.0,
"instances": 1,
"container": {
"type": "DOCKER",
"docker": {
"image": "consul:latest",
"name": "dev-consul",
"network": "HOST"
}
},
"constraints": [
[
"hostname",
"CLUSTER",
"server-1.local"
]
]
}
I need to be able to change the -bind address for each JSON file and I was planning on using heredocs with BASH but I am not sure if there are better practices as far as ease of maintainability for creating these type of files.
Ideally I would have liked to have a field in Consul or Marathon which could automatically give me the IP address of a specific port to feed to -bind but because I have multiple private IPs it seems I need to configure it manually.
It sounds like you have a configuration management issue.
If I understand you correctly you have a number of servers in an internal network where each has an internal IP address and you now want to generate the right service files for each server.
Typically you would use a configuration management system like e.g. Ansible, Chef or Puppet to solve this.
Personally I can recommend Ansible since it is easy to get started with and low overhead.
To solve your problem you would then first create an inventory file with the IP addresses of your servers and then create a Jinja2 template for your service files.
You can then use the correct IP address for each server in that template and finally deploy all the files with Ansible.
Look at consul 0.7.2 or newer. There is a soon-to-be documented feature in Consul that allows for runtime configuration of IP addresses. I wouldn't recommend running Consul in a container unless running net=host, but using the configuration snippet above:
{
"id": "consul-server-2",
"cmd": "consul agent -server -client='{{ GetPrivateIP }}' -ui -bind=100.10.30.40 -retry-join=server-1.local -data-dir=/tmp/consul",
"cpus": 1,
"mem": 512.0,
"instances": 1,
"container": {
"type": "DOCKER",
"docker": {
"image": "consul:latest",
"name": "dev-consul",
"network": "HOST"
}
},
"constraints": [
[
"hostname",
"CLUSTER",
"server-1.local"
]
]
}
Other options for what address to use can be explored based on the hashicorp/go-sockaddr package.
Using the latest version of Crossbar (0.13, installed from apt-get on Ubuntu 14.04) I am having trouble making connections using SSL and intermediate certificates.
If I set up the server without a ca_certificates property in the tls key then the server runs fine and connections can be made using Google Chrome via the wss protocol. However trying to make a connection using thruway fails with the following error:
Could not connect: Unable to complete SSL/TLS handshake: stream_socket_enable_crypto(): SSL operation failed with code 1. OpenSSL Error messages: error:14094410:SSL routines:ssl3_read_bytes:sslv3 alert handshake failure
Which having spoken with the Thruway team seems to be a certificate issue - on our live site we use an intermediate and cross-signed certificate from Gandi which is needed for some browsers and therefore some open-ssl implementations.
It seems that whilst browsers are happy to make a TLS connection with just a key and cert, Thruway requires a chain. However the configuration below using the two certificates provided by Gandi does not work for either Chrome or Thruway. Chrome shows the error:
failed: WebSocket opening handshake was canceled
When using the .crossbar/config.json file below. So, is this a problem with my config, with my certificates or with some other part of the Open-SSL stack?
(The file below has been altered to remove any potentially sensitive information so may appear like it wouldn't work for other reasons. If the connection works the underlying auth and other components work fine, so please keep answers/comments regarding the TLS implementation. The comments are not valid JSON but are included so readers can see the certificate files in use)
{
"version": 2,
"controller": {},
"workers": [
{
"type": "router",
"realms": [
{
"name": "test",
"roles": [
{
"name": "web",
"authorizer": "test.utils.permissions",
"disclose": {
"caller": true,
"publisher": true
}
},
{
"name": "no",
"permissions": []
}
]
}
],
"transports": [
{
"type": "websocket",
"endpoint": {
"type": "tcp",
"port": 9001,
"interface": "127.0.0.1"
},
"auth": {
"wampcra": {
"type": "static",
"users": {
"authenticator": {
"secret": "authenticator-REDACTED",
"role": "authenticator"
}
}
}
}
},
{
"type": "web",
"endpoint": {
"type": "tcp",
"port": 8089,
"tls": {
"key": "../ssl/key.pem",
"certificate": "../ssl/cert.pem",
"ca_certificates": [
"../ssl/gandi.pem", // https://www.gandi.net/static/CAs/GandiProSSLCA2.pem
"../ssl/gandi-cross-signed.pem" // https://wiki.gandi.net/en/ssl/intermediate#comodo_cross-signed_certificate
],
"dhparam": "../ssl/dhparam.pem"
}
},
"paths": {
"/": {
"type": "static",
"directory": "../web"
},
"ws": {
"type": "websocket",
"url": "wss://OUR-DOMAIN.com:8089/ws",
"auth": {
"wampcra": {
"type": "dynamic",
"authenticator": "test.utils.authenticate"
}
}
}
}
}
]
},
{
"type": "guest",
"executable": "/usr/bin/env",
"arguments": [
"php",
"../test.php",
"ws://127.0.0.1:9001",
"test",
"authenticator",
"authenticator-REDACTED"
]
}
]
}
There are other questions which address issues similar to this#
This one deals with the fact that any TLS error terminates a WSS connection with no useful error.
This one deals specifically with the handshake cancellation but in their case it was an improperly configured library used in compilation, which isn't relevant in this case as Crossbar has been installed from apt-get
This is not an issue with Crossbar. This appears to be a problem with the WAMP client - Thruway. Davidwdan is the owner of the Thruway Github repo and he says:
"Thruway's Ratchet transport provider does not directly support SSL. You'll need to put some sort of proxy in front of it."
You can find more information regarding what Davidwdan and others have to say about this right here https://github.com/voryx/Thruway/issues/163.
Now to get to the solution. Mind you, the following is only for Apache users. If you are running on Nginx the idea is pretty much the same.
A couple things to note before we get started.
Follow Crossbar's tutorial for the install! Don't try to do it yourself! There is more to setting up Crossbar then meets the eye. The fine folks over at Crossbar have laid out detailed instructions just for you! https://crossbar.io/docs/Installation/.
For this example, I have Crossbar and Apache running on the same machine. Although this is not a requirement and does not matter!
The first thing you want to do is create a new virtual host. I chose port 4043 for this virtual host, but you can choose whatever you would like. This virtual host is going to be for every WAMP library that does NOT have an issue connecting via wss:// (with an SSL). Here is a full list of WAMP clients: http://wamp-proto.org/implementations/. Make sure the ProxyPass directive and the ProxyPassReverse directive has the IP address pointing to the machine that the CROSSBAR router exists on. In my case since Apache and Crossbar are running on the same machine I just use 127.0.0.1. Also make sure the port being used in the ProxyPass directive and the ProxyPassReverse directive is the exact same as the port that you defined in your .crossbar/config.json! You will also need an SSL certificate set up on this virtual host as well, which you can see I have added below the Proxy directives.
Listen 4043
<VirtualHost *:4043>
ServerName example.org
ProxyRequests off
SSLProxyEngine on
ProxyPass /ws/ ws://127.0.0.1:8000/
ProxyPassReverse /ws/ ws://127.0.0.1:8000/
## Custom fragment
SSLEngine on
SSLCertificateFile /path/to/server_cert.pem
SSLCertificateKeyFile /path/to/server_key.pem
SSLCertificateChainFile /path/to/server_ca.pem
</VirtualHost>
Next, make sure your Crossbar router is NOT setup with an SSL! This is super important. Thruway or any other library that is NOT able to connect via SSL WON'T be able to use the router if you have it configured to use an SSL! Below is a working Crossbar config.json file that you would be able to use.
{
"version": 2,
"controller": {},
"workers": [
{
"type": "router",
"realms": [
{
"name": "production_realm",
"roles": [
{
"name": "production_role",
"permissions": [
{
"uri": "",
"match": "prefix",
"allow": {
"call": true,
"register": true,
"publish": true,
"subscribe": true
}
}
]
}
]
}
],
"transports": [
{
"type": "websocket",
"endpoint": {
"type": "tcp",
"port": 8000
},
"options": {
"allowed_origins": ["http://*","https://*"]
},
"auth": {
"ticket": {
"type": "static",
"principals": {
"production_user": {
"ticket": "tSjlwueuireladgte",
"role": "production_role"
}
}
}
}
}
]
}
]
}
Notice how the port number defined above matches the port number defined in the virtual host.
./crossbar/config.json:
"endpoint": {
"type": "tcp",
"port": 8000
},
virtual host:
ProxyPass /ws/ ws://127.0.0.1:8000/
ProxyPassReverse /ws/ ws://127.0.0.1:8000/
Also, if you read other tutorials, some people will tell you to make sure you use the ProxyPreserveHost directive in your virtual host file. DON'T LISTEN TO THEM! This will produce lots of unexpected results. When this directive is enabled, this option will pass the Host: line from the incoming request to the proxied host, instead of the hostname specified in the ProxyPass line! Even Apache says to stay away from this directive https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/mod_proxy.html#proxypreservehost. If you do have it enabled you will receive an error similar to below:
failing WebSocket opening handshake ('missing port in HTTP Host header
'example.org' and server runs on non-standard port 8000 (wss =
False)')
Last but not least, make sure all of the following Apache libraries are installed and enabled. On recent Apache installations all of the following libraries come installed by default and just need to be enabled:
$ sudo a2enmod proxy
$ sudo a2enmod proxy_http
$ sudo a2enmod proxy_balancer
$ sudo a2enmod lbmethod_byrequests
$ sudo a2enmod proxy_wstunnel
Make sure you open up whichever port your virtual host file is listening on and whichever port your crossbar router is listening on. In my case:
$ sudo ufw allow 4043
$ sudo ufw allow 8000
And finally restart Apache so all your changes can take effect.
$ sudo service apache2 restart
Last but not least I want to give a quick explanation of why all of this has to be done:
When you have an SSL certificate setup on your server the browser will throw an error when trying to connect to any WAMP router without using wss://.
Normally the solution to this would be to configure your WAMP router to use the SSL certificate that is already set up on your server.
The only issue with this is that Thruway.php (the only good php client I know that works with WAMP) does not play well with wss://. Even the creators of Thruway.php on GitHub say it doesn’t work.
The solution to this issues is to use a reverse proxy.
First you need to set up your WAMP router and make sure it is not using an SSL certificate.
Next you need to setup a reverse proxy so wss:// requests get converted to ws://. This will allow your browser to connect to the WAMP router without complaining.
Since the WAMP router is not set up to use an SSL, Thruway.php will work fine as well!
And well.... That's all folks! I know I needed to give a detailed answer to this question because it took me 5 days to figure all of this out!
#Tay-Bae's answer was already very useful. But it wasn't working for me, the client was getting a 200 OK response. All I need to do is to forward WSS traffic to my internal WS client which does not support WSS (Thruway).
After looking in the forums, I stumbled uppon this answer : https://serverfault.com/a/846936.
They add a rewrite part which seems to be required to re-route the request. I thought ProxyPassReverse should do it, but it doesn't. So here's my working config :
Listen 4043
<VirtualHost *:4043>
ServerName mydomain.net
ProxyRequests off
SSLProxyEngine on
ProxyPass /ws/ ws://127.0.0.1:8080/
ProxyPassReverse /ws/ ws://127.0.0.1:8080/
## Custom fragment
SSLEngine on
SSLCertificateFile /etc/letsencrypt/live/mydomaine.net/cert.pem
SSLCertificateKeyFile /etc/letsencrypt/live/mydomain.net/privkey.pem
SSLCertificateChainFile /etc/letsencrypt/live/mydomain.net/chain.pem
<IfModule mod_rewrite.c>
RewriteEngine on
RewriteCond %{HTTP:UPGRADE} ^WebSocket$ [NC]
RewriteCond %{HTTP:CONNECTION} Upgrade$ [NC]
RewriteRule .* ws://localhost:8080%{REQUEST_URI} [P]
</IfModule>
LogLevel debug
ErrorLog ${APACHE_LOG_DIR}/error_thruway.log
CustomLog ${APACHE_LOG_DIR}/access_thruway.log combined
</VirtualHost>