-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Burton Strauss wrote on 4-6-2005 14:25:
> How about the stats from the plugin itself?

The packetcounts from Ntop netflow are taken from the stats from the
plugin itself:

Flow Statistics
Received Flows
Flow Senders    130.89.244.12 [2,251,319 pkts]

Number of Packets Received      2,251,319
Number of Packets with Bad Version      0
Number of Packets Processed     2,251,319
Number of Valid Flows Received  65,850,914
Average Number of Flows per Packet      29.2
Number of V1 Flows Received     0
Number of V5 Flows Received     65,850,914
Number of V7 Flows Received     0
Number of V9 Flows Received     0

Discarded Flows
Number of Flows with Zero Packet Count  0
Number of Flows with Zero Byte Count    0
Number of Flows with Bad Data   0
Number of Flows with Unknown Template   0
Total Number of Flows Processed         65,850,914

Flowtools reports:
- -------------------
Jun  6 09:41:00 localhost flow-capture[27759]: STAT: now=1118043660
startup=1117802440 src_ip=127.0.0.1 dst_ip=127.0.0.1 d_ver=5
pkts=4590376 flows=133781439 lost=0 reset=0 filter_drops=0
Jun  6 09:42:00 localhost flow-capture[27759]: STAT: now=1118043720
startup=1117802440 src_ip=127.0.0.1 dst_ip=127.0.0.1 d_ver=5
pkts=4592106 flows=133831723 lost=0 reset=0 filter_drops=0
Jun  6 09:43:00 localhost flow-capture[27759]: STAT: now=1118043780
startup=1117802440 src_ip=127.0.0.1 dst_ip=127.0.0.1 d_ver=5
pkts=4595919 flows=133942507 lost=0 reset=0 filter_drops=0
- --------------------

Cisco Netflow reports:
- --------------------
UTWENTE-router>sh ip flow export
Flow export is enabled
  Exporting flows to x.x.x.x (2055)
  Exporting using source interface Vlan102
  Version 5 flow records
  *21104941* flows exported in *703498* udp datagrams
  0 flows failed due to lack of export packet
  0 export packets were sent up to process level
  0 export packets were dropped due to no fib
  0 export packets were dropped due to adjacency issues
  0 export packets were dropped due to fragmentation failures
  0 export packets were dropped due to encapsulation fixup failures
  0 export packets were dropped enqueuing for the RP
  0 export packets were dropped due to IPC rate limiting
UTWENTE-router>sh mls nde
 Netflow Data Export enabled
 Exporting flows to x.x.x.x (2055)
 Exporting flows from y.y.y.y (49744)
 Version: 5
 Include Filter not configured
 Exclude Filter not configured
 Total Netflow Data Export Packets are:
    *3892409* packets, 0 no packets, *112837207* records
 Total Netflow Data Export Send Errors:
        IPWRITE_NO_FIB = 0
        IPWRITE_ADJ_FAILED = 0
        IPWRITE_PROCESS = 0
        IPWRITE_ENQUEUE_FAILED = 0
        IPWRITE_IPC_FAILED = 0
        IPWRITE_MTU_FAILED = 0
        IPWRITE_ENCAPFIX_FAILED = 0
UTWENTE-router>sho clo
09:42:52.569 MET-DST Mon Jun 6 2005
- --------------------

This measurement runs from Fri 3jun
Cisco and Flowtools reports both the same packets/flows:

Cisco: 21104941+112837207= 133,942,148  flowtools: 133,942,507 (flows)
Cisco: 703498+3892409= 4,595,907        flowtools: 4,595,919   (packets)

Netflowplugin: 65,850,914 flows
Netflowplugin: 2,251,319 packets


N.B. counters are reset and read manualy on 'about' the same time.
(within 30 sec)

> -----Burton 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of R.H.Hoek
> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 9:15 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Ntop-dev] netflow-plugin misses packets
> 
> Dear Ntoppers,
> 
> Some weeks ago I already mentioned that I experience some problems with Ntop
> in combination with Netflow from a Cisco6509 with supervisor2.
> Some of you gave me some hints, but nothing couldn't solve my problem (see
> below).
> 
> The problem is that the Netflow-plugin misses about 40-60% of the
> netflowpackets send by the Cisco6509. Some figures:
> 
> Last night, in a period of about 17 hours the Cisco has sendout
> 31,274,087 flows in 1,073,210 packets.
> The Netflow-plugin reports it received 16,035,229 valid flows in 548,345
> packets. The plugin reports no discarded flow.
> 
> My first though is that it is not the hardware. I (can) run Ntop on two
> different systems, but experience on both the same problem:
> System1:
> Dual-Xeon 3.2GHz, 5GB RAM, with 4 disks in two hardware SCSI raidsets
> (RAID1)(18GB,73GB) and 100M/1G Ethernet interface with a 100Mbps
> networkconecction. On this system the OS is SuSE-UnitedLinux 8. (2.4 kernel)
> System2(originally meant for probe):
> Dual-Xeon 3.2GHz, 3GB RAM, with 2 disks in a hardware SCSI raidsets
> (RAID1)(18GB) and 100M/1G Ethernet interface with a 100Mbps
> networkconecction. On this system the OS is Debian Sarge 2.6 kernel.
> 
> I have done testing with Ntop 3.1 and the latest CVS versions -> same
> results. With tcpdump I did some counting. The conclusion is that the
> packets send by Cisco6509 are received on the system Ntop is running on, but
> are discarded/missed by the Netflow-plugin
> 
> Answers on some questions:
> 1)
> Ntop is running with --interface-none, --track-local-host and the Netflow
> pseudo-nic is selected.
> 2)
> Even, with RRD-plugin is set to low-detail, and data to dump is 'none'
> does not solve the problem
> 3)
> for testing I have incremented MAX_SUBNET_HOSTS to 8192/16384 in
> globals-defines.h.
> Load avg 0.14 (98% idle)
> The memory usage is about 1.8GB (3.3 GB free) after 1 hour Ntop is started.
> 4)
> The load graph and (traffic)protocol-distribution should display the total
> network load of the Cisco6509 when the pseudo-nic is selected. I have seen
> this on a Ntop system with low netflowtraffic.
> 5)
> In a test config the Cisco-Netflow is first send to system2 and
> redistributed with flow-fanout to system1 running Ntop. On system2 I do
> flow-capture and flow-stat. When I compare this output with Ntop-output, the
> differences are very large as of 5min net workload and protocol
> distribution.
> 6)
> The average netflowstream is about 20 packets/s. But I have seen bursts of
> 900 packets/s
> 
> 
> 
> I think that the last point is possibly the problem. With these bursts the
> netflowplugin inputbuffer is overloaded ?
> Is there a way to tune this buffer? Or does anybody else has some hints?
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Groeten,
> 
> Roel H.Hoek, SeniorNetworkmanager
> Dienst Informatietechnologie, Bibliotheek en Educatie (ITBE) Universiteit
> Twente,  Postbus 217,  7500 AE  Enschede kmr SP 422, telefoon: 053 - 489
> 4598,  fax: 053 - 489 2383
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.utwente.nl/itbe
> 
_______________________________________________
Ntop-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-dev

_______________________________________________
Ntop-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-dev


- --

Groeten,

Roel H.Hoek, SeniorNetworkmanager
Dienst Informatietechnologie, Bibliotheek en Educatie (ITBE)
Universiteit Twente,  Postbus 217,  7500 AE  Enschede
kmr SP 422, telefoon: 053 - 489 4598,  fax: 053 - 489 2383
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.utwente.nl/itbe

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCpAQJJwlRSGnYBcYRAva7AKC7obriggq0ebIyFhup65bKyh5lSACfZfJI
Xv97uZooRktzyNcr1eVYPxg=
=DSvF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Ntop-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-dev

Reply via email to