We seem to be having a problem with the hashing functionality of PF_RING.
One snort process appears to be getting the lions share of the packets,
giving it a high drop rate (the percentages below are questionable).

    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12300]:    Analyzed:    271306688
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12300]:     Dropped:          712 (
 0.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12302]:    Analyzed:    316147617
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12302]:     Dropped:      1127688 (
 0.355%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12304]:    Analyzed:   2154918764(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12304]:     Dropped:        82205 (
 0.004%)

**  Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12306]:    Analyzed:   1559887127
(100.000%)
**  Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12306]:     Dropped:   2889701486 (
64.943%)

    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12308]:    Analyzed:    278222877
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12308]:     Dropped:         5283 (
 0.002%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12310]:    Analyzed:    500304473
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12310]:     Dropped:            0 (
 0.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12312]:    Analyzed:    476476420
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12312]:     Dropped:         2872 (
 0.001%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12314]:    Analyzed:    310040648
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12314]:     Dropped:         8970 (
 0.003%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12316]:    Analyzed:    275970056
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12316]:     Dropped:            0 (
 0.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12318]:    Analyzed:    268692346
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12318]:     Dropped:            0 (
 0.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12320]:    Analyzed:    472844029
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12320]:     Dropped:        16234 (
 0.003%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12322]:    Analyzed:    414535582
(100.000%)
    Jan 29 11:22:03 snorthost snort[12322]:     Dropped:            0 (
 0.000%)

We're running 12 snorts like so:

    snort -D -i eth6 --daq pfring --daq-var clustermode=5 --daq-var
clusterid=44
    --daq-var bindcpu=1 -c /etc/snort/snort.conf -l /var/log/snort1 -R 1

    snort -D -i eth6 --daq pfring --daq-var clustermode=5 --daq-var
clusterid=44
    --daq-var bindcpu=2 -c /etc/snort/snort.conf -l /var/log/snort2 -R 2

    snort -D -i eth6 --daq pfring --daq-var clustermode=5 --daq-var
clusterid=44
    --daq-var bindcpu=3 -c /etc/snort/snort.conf -l /var/log/snort3 -R 3

    snort -D -i eth6 --daq pfring --daq-var clustermode=5 --daq-var
clusterid=44
    --daq-var bindcpu=4 -c /etc/snort/snort.conf -l /var/log/snort4 -R 4

etc...

I've tried various settings for the clustermode and the result seems to be
the
same. Varying the number of snort processes also doesn't seem to make a
difference, and neither did changing enable_frag_coherence when insmodding
the pf_ring kernel module.

Anyone have any ideas?

PF_RING : 5.6.1
snort   : 2.9.5.6

% ethtool -k eth6
Offload parameters for eth6:
rx-checksumming: off
tx-checksumming: off
scatter-gather: off
tcp-segmentation-offload: off
udp-fragmentation-offload: off
generic-segmentation-offload: off
generic-receive-offload: off
large-receive-offload: off

Thanks,

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

Reply via email to