Good morning Alfredo,

Just wanted to follow up and confirm that you received the 5 pcaps I
sent off-list yesterday.

Is there anything else I can provide to help troubleshoot this issue?

Thanks!

Doug


On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Alfredo Cardigliano
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Doug
>> I don't think the support for packet injection is going to interfere your 
>> test.
>> Could you try sending packets from another interface?
>
> I've confirmed this behavior using tcpreplay in a VM and also on a
> physical sensor connected to a tap.
>
>> Could you provide me the original pcap you are using and the produced pcaps?
>
> Sent off-list.
>
> Please let me know if there is anything else I can provide to help
> troubleshoot this issue.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Doug
>>
>> Thanks
>> Alfredo
>>
>> On Jun 2, 2013, at 11:40 PM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I see this in the Changelog:
>>>
>>> - Support for injecting packets to the stack
>>>
>>> Is it possible that this change could have an impact on my test since
>>> I'm using tcpreplay?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Doug
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> cat /proc/net/pf_ring/info
>>>>
>>>> PF_RING Version          : 5.5.3 ($Revision: $)
>>>> Total rings              : 2
>>>>
>>>> Standard (non DNA) Options
>>>> Ring slots               : 4096
>>>> Slot version             : 15
>>>> Capture TX               : Yes [RX+TX]
>>>> IP Defragment            : No
>>>> Socket Mode              : Standard
>>>> Transparent mode         : Yes [mode 0]
>>>> Total plugins            : 0
>>>> Cluster Fragment Queue   : 0
>>>> Cluster Fragment Discard : 16830
>>>>
>>>> I've tried a few different pcaps, some of them are like my testmyids
>>>> sample in that no packets make it to pfdump, others work perfectly,
>>>> while for others it looks like only some of the packets are making it
>>>> into pfdump:
>>>>
>>>> sudo tcpreplay -i eth1 -M10 
>>>> /opt/samples/markofu/honeynet_suspicious-time.pcap
>>>> sending out eth1
>>>> processing file: /opt/samples/markofu/honeynet_suspicious-time.pcap
>>>> Actual: 745 packets (293958 bytes) sent in 0.32 seconds
>>>> Rated: 918618.8 bps, 7.01 Mbps, 2328.12 pps
>>>> Statistics for network device: eth1
>>>> Attempted packets:         745
>>>> Successful packets:        745
>>>> Failed packets:            0
>>>> Retried packets (ENOBUFS): 0
>>>> Retried packets (EAGAIN):  0
>>>>
>>>> sudo ./pfdump -l77 -i eth1 -w instance1.pcap
>>>> Using PF_RING v.5.5.3
>>>> Capturing from eth1 [00:0C:29:5F:58:D8][ifIndex: 3]
>>>> # Device RX channels: 1
>>>> pfring_set_cluster returned 0
>>>> 1 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 2 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 3 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 4 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 5 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 6 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 7 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 8 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 9 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 10 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 11 sec pkts 257 drop 0 bytes 81262 | pkts 257 bytes 81262 drop 0
>>>> 12 sec pkts 136 drop 0 bytes 72265 | pkts 393 bytes 153527 drop 0
>>>> 13 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 393 bytes 153527 drop 0
>>>> 14 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 393 bytes 153527 drop 0
>>>> 15 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 393 bytes 153527 drop 0
>>>> 16 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 393 bytes 153527 drop 0
>>>> 17 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 393 bytes 153527 drop 0
>>>> ^CLeaving...
>>>> 18 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 393 bytes 153527 drop 0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> sudo ./pfdump -l77 -i eth1 -w instance2.pcap
>>>> Using PF_RING v.5.5.3
>>>> Capturing from eth1 [00:0C:29:5F:58:D8][ifIndex: 3]
>>>> # Device RX channels: 1
>>>> pfring_set_cluster returned 0
>>>> 1 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 2 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 3 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 4 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 5 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 6 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 7 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 8 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 9 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>> 10 sec pkts 21 drop 0 bytes 6352 | pkts 21 bytes 6352 drop 0
>>>> 11 sec pkts 15 drop 0 bytes 3640 | pkts 36 bytes 9992 drop 0
>>>> 12 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 36 bytes 9992 drop 0
>>>> 13 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 36 bytes 9992 drop 0
>>>> 14 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 36 bytes 9992 drop 0
>>>> 15 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 36 bytes 9992 drop 0
>>>> 16 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 36 bytes 9992 drop 0
>>>> ^CLeaving...
>>>> 17 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 36 bytes 9992 drop 0
>>>>
>>>> What else can I test?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Doug
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Doug
>>>>> I ran a test using curl + pfcount and it is working for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> $ curl testmyids.com
>>>>>
>>>>> (first instance)
>>>>> $ ./pfcount -i eth0 -c 99 -v 1 -m
>>>>> ...
>>>>> Absolute Stats: [0 pkts rcvd][0 pkts filtered][0 pkts dropped]
>>>>>
>>>>> (second instance)
>>>>> $ ./pfcount -i eth0 -c 99 -v 1 -m
>>>>> ...
>>>>> Absolute Stats: [11 pkts rcvd][11 pkts filtered][0 pkts dropped]
>>>>>
>>>>> Please make sure tx capture is enabled in your test (cat 
>>>>> /proc/net/pf_ring/info)
>>>>>
>>>>> Alfredo
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 2, 2013, at 7:43 PM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Alfredo,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for your suggestion!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've changed pfdump.c to use cluster_per_flow_2_tuple:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if(clusterId > 0) {
>>>>>>   rc = pfring_set_cluster(pd, clusterId, cluster_per_flow_2_tuple);
>>>>>>   printf("pfring_set_cluster returned %d\n", rc);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I then re-ran the test as follows:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Replayed a TCP stream with 11 packets onto eth1:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sudo tcpreplay -i eth1 -M10 testmyids.pcap
>>>>>> sending out eth1
>>>>>> processing file: testmyids.pcap
>>>>>> Actual: 11 packets (1062 bytes) sent in 0.00 seconds
>>>>>> Rated: inf bps, inf Mbps, inf pps
>>>>>> Statistics for network device: eth1
>>>>>> Attempted packets:         11
>>>>>> Successful packets:        11
>>>>>> Failed packets:            0
>>>>>> Retried packets (ENOBUFS): 0
>>>>>> Retried packets (EAGAIN):  0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ran two instances of pfdump on eth1 with same clusterId but neither of
>>>>>> them saw traffic this time:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sudo ./pfdump -l77 -i eth1 -w instance1.pcap
>>>>>> Using PF_RING v.5.5.3
>>>>>> Capturing from eth1 [00:0C:29:5F:58:D8][ifIndex: 3]
>>>>>> # Device RX channels: 1
>>>>>> pfring_set_cluster returned 0
>>>>>> 1 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 2 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 3 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 4 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 5 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 6 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 7 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 8 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 9 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 10 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 11 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 12 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 13 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> ^CLeaving...
>>>>>> 14 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sudo ./pfdump -l77 -i eth1 -w instance2.pcap
>>>>>> Using PF_RING v.5.5.3
>>>>>> Capturing from eth1 [00:0C:29:5F:58:D8][ifIndex: 3]
>>>>>> # Device RX channels: 1
>>>>>> pfring_set_cluster returned 0
>>>>>> 1 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 2 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 3 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 4 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 5 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 6 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 7 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 8 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 9 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 10 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 11 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> 12 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>> ^CLeaving...
>>>>>> 13 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 0 bytes 0 drop 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> tcpdump -nnvvr instance1.pcap
>>>>>> reading from file instance1.pcap, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> tcpdump -nnvvr instance2.pcap
>>>>>> reading from file instance2.pcap, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've repeated this a few times and get the same result each time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any ideas why cluster_per_flow_2_tuple wouldn't be passing the traffic?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doug
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Doug
>>>>>>> the code in pfcount sets  the cluster mode to round-robin,
>>>>>>> for flow coherency you should change it to (for instance)
>>>>>>> cluster_per_flow_2_tuple.
>>>>>>> The daq-pfring code sets the cluster mode to cluster_per_flow_2_tuple by
>>>>>>> default.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>>>> Alfredo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Index: pfcount.c
>>>>>>> ===================================================================
>>>>>>> --- pfcount.c (revisione 6336)
>>>>>>> +++ pfcount.c (copia locale)
>>>>>>> @@ -924,7 +924,7 @@
>>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  if(clusterId > 0) {
>>>>>>> -    rc = pfring_set_cluster(pd, clusterId, cluster_round_robin);
>>>>>>> +    rc = pfring_set_cluster(pd, clusterId, cluster_per_flow_2_tuple);
>>>>>>>    printf("pfring_set_cluster returned %d\n", rc);
>>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jun 2, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I copied the clusterId code from pfcount and pasted into pfdump and
>>>>>>> compiled it.  Then tested with a fresh pcap of "curl testmyids.com":
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tcpdump -nnr testmyids.pcap
>>>>>>> reading from file testmyids.pcap, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet)
>>>>>>> 12:37:21.846561 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags [S],
>>>>>>> seq 2183306783, win 42340, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 13599714
>>>>>>> ecr 0,nop,wscale 11], length 0
>>>>>>> 12:37:21.963023 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags
>>>>>>> [S.], seq 3354284181, ack 2183306784, win 64240, options [mss 1460],
>>>>>>> length 0
>>>>>>> 12:37:21.963070 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 1, win 42340, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:37:21.963268 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [P.], seq 1:166, ack 1, win 42340, length 165
>>>>>>> 12:37:21.963423 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 166, win 64240, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:37:22.083864 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags
>>>>>>> [P.], seq 1:260, ack 166, win 64240, length 259
>>>>>>> 12:37:22.083906 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 260, win 42081, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:37:22.084118 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [F.], seq 166, ack 260, win 42081, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:37:22.085362 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 167, win 64239, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:37:22.202741 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags
>>>>>>> [FP.], seq 260, ack 167, win 64239, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:37:22.202786 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 261, win 42081, length 0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I then started the two instances of pfdump using the same clusterId
>>>>>>> and then replayed the 11 packets with tcpreplay:
>>>>>>> sudo tcpreplay -i eth1 -M10 testmyids.pcap
>>>>>>> sending out eth1
>>>>>>> processing file: testmyids.pcap
>>>>>>> Actual: 11 packets (1062 bytes) sent in 0.01 seconds
>>>>>>> Rated: 106200.0 bps, 0.81 Mbps, 1100.00 pps
>>>>>>> Statistics for network device: eth1
>>>>>>> Attempted packets:         11
>>>>>>> Successful packets:        11
>>>>>>> Failed packets:            0
>>>>>>> Retried packets (ENOBUFS): 0
>>>>>>> Retried packets (EAGAIN):  0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FIRST INSTANCE OF PFDUMP
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sudo ./pfdump -l77 -i eth1 -w instance1.pcap
>>>>>>> Using PF_RING v.5.5.3
>>>>>>> Capturing from eth1 [00:0C:29:5F:58:D8][ifIndex: 3]
>>>>>>> # Device RX channels: 1
>>>>>>> pfring_set_cluster returned 0
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>> 241 sec pkts 6 drop 0 bytes 500 | pkts 6 bytes 500 drop 0
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tcpdump -nnr instance1.pcap
>>>>>>> reading from file instance1.pcap, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet)
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.886037 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags [S],
>>>>>>> seq 2183306783, win 42340, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 13599714
>>>>>>> ecr 0,nop,wscale 11], length 0
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.886889 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 3354284182, win 42340, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.887325 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 165, win 64240, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.887986 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 260, win 42081, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.888306 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 166, win 64239, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.888741 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags [.],
>>>>>>> ack 261, win 42081, length 0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> SECOND INSTANCE OF PFDUMP
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sudo ./pfdump -l77 -i eth1 -w instance2.pcap
>>>>>>> Using PF_RING v.5.5.3
>>>>>>> Capturing from eth1 [00:0C:29:5F:58:D8][ifIndex: 3]
>>>>>>> # Device RX channels: 1
>>>>>>> pfring_set_cluster returned 0
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>> 16 sec pkts 5 drop 0 bytes 826 | pkts 5 bytes 826 drop 0
>>>>>>> 17 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 5 bytes 826 drop 0
>>>>>>> 18 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 5 bytes 826 drop 0
>>>>>>> 19 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 5 bytes 826 drop 0
>>>>>>> ^CLeaving...
>>>>>>> 20 sec pkts 0 drop 0 bytes 0 | pkts 5 bytes 826 drop 0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tcpdump -nnr instance2.pcap
>>>>>>> reading from file instance2.pcap, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet)
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.886499 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags
>>>>>>> [S.], seq 3354284181, ack 2183306784, win 64240, options [mss 1460],
>>>>>>> length 0
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.887129 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [P.], seq 1:166, ack 1, win 42340, length 165
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.887666 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags
>>>>>>> [P.], seq 1:260, ack 166, win 64240, length 259
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.888117 IP 172.16.116.128.44229 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [F.], seq 166, ack 260, win 42081, length 0
>>>>>>> 12:38:55.888530 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 172.16.116.128.44229: Flags
>>>>>>> [FP.], seq 260, ack 167, win 64239, length 0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As you can see, the first instance sees 6 packets and the second
>>>>>>> instance sees 5 packets.  Shouldn't all 11 packets in that TCP stream
>>>>>>> be sent to the same instance?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doug
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Luca,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can repeat the test with pfdump when I'm back at my computer, but is 
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>> something in particular you're looking for that wasn't in the pfcount 
>>>>>>> output
>>>>>>> I provided?  Shouldn't all the traffic from that one TCP stream be sent 
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> one instance of pfcount?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Doug
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sunday, June 2, 2013, Luca Deri wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>> You're right. We need to add it: you can c&p the code from pfcount in 
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> meantime
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Luca
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jun 2, 2013, at 1:54 AM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have pfdump now but I don't see a cluster-id option.  Did you mean
>>>>>>> pfcount?  If I run 2 instances of pfcount with the same cluster-id and
>>>>>>> then replay a pcap with 10 packets all belonging to the same TCP
>>>>>>> stream, I get 5 packets being sent to each pfcount instance.
>>>>>>> Shouldn't all 10 packets be sent to 1 instance?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First instance:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sudo ./pfcount -c77 -i eth1
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>> =========================
>>>>>>> Absolute Stats: [5 pkts rcvd][5 pkts filtered][0 pkts dropped]
>>>>>>> Total Pkts=5/Dropped=0.0 %
>>>>>>> 5 pkts - 434 bytes [0.38 pkt/sec - 0.00 Mbit/sec]
>>>>>>> =========================
>>>>>>> Actual Stats: 5 pkts [1'000.75 ms][5.00 pps/0.00 Gbps]
>>>>>>> =========================
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Second instance:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sudo ./pfcount -c77 -i eth1
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>> =========================
>>>>>>> Absolute Stats: [5 pkts rcvd][5 pkts filtered][0 pkts dropped]
>>>>>>> Total Pkts=5/Dropped=0.0 %
>>>>>>> 5 pkts - 834 bytes [0.62 pkt/sec - 0.00 Mbit/sec]
>>>>>>> =========================
>>>>>>> Actual Stats: 5 pkts [1'001.39 ms][4.99 pps/0.00 Gbps]
>>>>>>> =========================
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The replayed pcap is just ten packets that result from "curl
>>>>>>> testmyids.com":
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tcpdump -nnr testmyids.pcap
>>>>>>> reading from file testmyids.pcap, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet)
>>>>>>> 11:46:11.691648 IP 192.168.111.111.50154 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [S], seq 3840903154, win 42340, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val
>>>>>>> 20137183 ecr 0,nop,wscale 11], length 0
>>>>>>> 11:46:11.808833 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 192.168.111.111.50154: Flags
>>>>>>> [S.], seq 2859277445, ack 3840903155, win 5840, options [mss
>>>>>>> 1460,nop,wscale 7], length 0
>>>>>>> 11:46:11.808854 IP 192.168.111.111.50154 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [.], ack 1, win 21, length 0
>>>>>>> 11:46:11.809083 IP 192.168.111.111.50154 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [P.], seq 1:166, ack 1, win 21, length 165
>>>>>>> 11:46:11.927518 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 192.168.111.111.50154: Flags
>>>>>>> [.], ack 166, win 54, length 0
>>>>>>> 11:46:12.036708 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 192.168.111.111.50154: Flags
>>>>>>> [P.], seq 1:260, ack 166, win 54, length 259
>>>>>>> 11:46:12.036956 IP 192.168.111.111.50154 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [.], ack 260, win 21, length 0
>>>>>>> 11:46:12.037206 IP 192.168.111.111.50154 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [F.], seq 166, ack 260, win 21, length 0
>>>>>>> 11:46:12.154641 IP 217.160.51.31.80 > 192.168.111.111.50154: Flags
>>>>>>> [F.], seq 260, ack 167, win 54, length 0
>>>>>>> 11:46:12.154888 IP 192.168.111.111.50154 > 217.160.51.31.80: Flags
>>>>>>> [.], ack 261, win 21, length 0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Doug
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Luca Deri <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Doug
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jun 1, 2013, at 6:59 AM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I recently packaged PF_RING 5.5.3 for my Security Onion distro:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://securityonion.blogspot.com/2013/05/pfring-553-packages-now-available.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps I'm missing something, but I'm seeing some behavior I don't
>>>>>>> remember seeing in 5.5.2 or previous versions of PF_RING.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here are my testing parameters:
>>>>>>> - starting off with a good test, if I run just one instance of snort,
>>>>>>> I get an alert from rule 2100498 for EACH time I run "curl
>>>>>>> testmyids.com"
>>>>>>> - if I increase to two instances of snort with the same cluster-id, I
>>>>>>> get NO alerts when running "curl testmyids.com"
>>>>>>> - if I set the daq clustermode to 2, I get NO alerts when running
>>>>>>> "curl > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Doug Burks
>>>>>>> http://securityonion.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Doug Burks
>>>>>>> http://securityonion.blogspot.com
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Doug Burks
>>>>>> http://securityonion.blogspot.com
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Doug Burks
>>>> http://securityonion.blogspot.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Doug Burks
>>> http://securityonion.blogspot.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
>
>
> --
> Doug Burks
> http://securityonion.blogspot.com



-- 
Doug Burks
http://securityonion.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Ntop-misc mailing list
[email protected]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc

Reply via email to