I pulled new code from svn, compiled and inserted the new kernel
module, and verified that I get the same results.

I see this in the 5.5.3 Changelog:

- Added ability to balance tunneled/fragmented packets with the cluster

Is it possible that this change is affecting the hashing mechanism?

Anything else I can try?

Thanks,
Doug


On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 6:40 AM, Alfredo Cardigliano
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Good morning Doug
> I received the pcap but I was traveling, I will check them asap
>
> Thanks
> Alfredo
>
> On Jun 4, 2013, at 12:30 PM, Doug Burks <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to