Sweet, I think I have a somewhat better understanding now.

Thanks!

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano
<[email protected]>wrote:

> On Mar 5, 2013, at 4:48 PM, J of Core <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I was wondering if someone would be so kind as to explain how the
> clustermode / tuple hashing affects how pf_ring runs.  I did some reading
> on tuples, but it's still a bit unclear to me.
>
>
> In linux/pf_ring.h there are some comments describing each cluster mode:
>
>   cluster_per_flow = 0, /* 6-tuple: <src ip, src port, dst ip, dst port,
> proto, vlan>  */
>   cluster_round_robin,
>   cluster_per_flow_2_tuple, /* 2-tuple: <src ip,           dst ip
>               >  */
>   cluster_per_flow_4_tuple, /* 4-tuple: <src ip, src port, dst ip, dst
> port             >  */
>   cluster_per_flow_5_tuple, /* 5-tuple: <src ip, src port, dst ip, dst
> port, proto      >  */
>   cluster_per_flow_tcp_5_tuple, /* 5-tuple only with TCP, 2 tuple with
> all other protos   */
>
> Should the number that is set for the cluster mode be related to the
> number of pf_ring / snort instances that I'm running?
>
>
> No, the cluster mode represent the way the hash is computed on the packet,
> then the packet is delivered to the instance hash%num_instances.
>
> Or is it determined some other way?  Basically I'm trying to understand
> how to determine what number would be good to set for the clustermode, or
> if I should just leave it alone.
>
>
> If you are not sure, leave the default.
>
> Best Regards
> Alfredo
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Please make sure your traffic is well balanced (i.e. that you are not
>> using test traffic with a single flow), by default a 2-tuple hashing is
>> used, you can change this setting using the clustermode parameter as
>> reported in PF_RING/userland/snort/pfring-daq-module/README.1st
>>
>>    --daq-var clustermode=<mode>
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Alfredo
>>
>> On Mar 2, 2013, at 12:30 AM, J of Core <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the reply, Jesse.  I tried running multiples w/diff pid files,
>> log files, etc, but when I watch the counters I still only see one instance
>> increasing.
>>
>> I also did s'more searching online and found this on the metaflows google
>> group:
>> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/metaflows/Tjagd3MPr70
>>
>> According to that post, I should be able to "run the command twice with
>> the same exact arguments and they will slip the traffic. The pfring kernel
>> module will automatically detect how many processes are running and split
>> the traffic accordingly"  -- but that isn't working for me either.  That
>> post is from 2011 so I'm not sure if things have changed since then or not.
>>
>> So not sure what I'm missing to make it distribute the traffic between
>> processes/instances.  I'll keep investigating / testing :)
>>
>> thx
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Jesse Bowling <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>
>>> This is what I get for reading in reverse order. :)
>>>
>>> You are correct in what you wrote: you do have it up and running it
>>> would seem. To run more instances, you need to start multiple instances of
>>> snort and make sure that you pass them the same clusterid.
>>>
>>> The only tricky part is making sure that each snort instance has it's
>>> own PID file, config file, logging directory, etc; that's usually the
>>> hardest part of getting multiple snort instances up. :)
>>>
>>> There are a few strategies for managing the snort instance configs, but
>>> the one I've seen described that I liked the most was to create a vanilla
>>> config that expresses the things you want for every instance, and then
>>> create individual configs for each instance specifying only the things that
>>> are different and including the vanilla one. For instance:
>>>
>>> snort.master.conf:
>>>
>>> config interface: eth0
>>> include /rules/SOme_rule_file
>>> etc
>>>
>>> and then:
>>>
>>> inst1.conf:
>>>
>>> config logdir: /nsm/snort/inst1
>>> include snort.master.conf
>>>
>>> That makes it a little easier to maintain your conf files...
>>>
>>> GL,
>>>
>>> Jesse
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Kevin Hanser <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So I appear to have pf_ring installed (via the RPMs) and snort working
>>>> with it.  If I start up a snort instance using a command line similar to
>>>> the metaflows article (except I'm doing passive instead of inline for the
>>>> time being):
>>>>
>>>> snort -c /etc/snort/snort.conf -y -i eth0 --daq-dir /usr/local/lib/daq
>>>> --daq pfring --daq-var clusterid=10 --daq-mode passive
>>>>
>>>> I get a status counter "device" created in /proc/net/pf_ring named
>>>> <pid>-eth0.1.  If I watch this file with cat while sending some traffic to
>>>> the machine, I see the counters increasing, and snort is logging the
>>>> information.  So based on this, it seems that snort is working with
>>>> pf_ring, which was my "first step" so that's pretty cool.
>>>>
>>>> Now I'm trying to figure out how I distribute the load across multiple
>>>> snort / pf_ring instances.  I started up multiple instances of snort, but
>>>> when I watch the counters it seems that only the one I started last is
>>>> getting all the traffic.  I'm probably missing something in how I start it
>>>> up, but I'm unsure what.
>>>>
>>>> What do I need to tell pf_ring / snort so that they distribute the load
>>>> across the multiple rings / snorts?  Is that what the clusterid=10 means?
>>>>  Is that telling each pf_ring that it's part of the same cluster?  I'm
>>>> still working on understanding how all this works together so if anyone has
>>>> any thoughts / suggestions that would be great!  I'll keep researching and
>>>> reading and testing on my own as well,
>>>>
>>>> thx!
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jesse Bowling
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Ntop-misc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ntop-misc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>
>
_______________________________________________
Ntop-misc mailing list
[email protected]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc

Reply via email to