> On 11 Nov 2016, at 10:31, Chandrika Gautam <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Alfredo, > > I have not used any packages. > I downloaded the latest PFRING from https://github.com/ntop/PF_RING > <https://github.com/ntop/PF_RING> and selected Branch as dev and Saved the > Zip file using CloneorDownload option. > I compiled the PFRING source code and used all the necessary files. I can see > the changes you have done in pf_ring.c also. > > I think version is not displayed due to some issues with git. Received this > error while executing ./configure in kernel directory. > fatal: Not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
Ok got it > Have you used any pfring examples to verify these changes? Yes, I ran 2 instances of pfcount using this command line: ./pfcount -i eth2 -c 99 -H 2 -v 1 -m Alfredo > > Regards, > Chandrika > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi Gautam > for some reason I do not see the pf_ring revision here, please make sure the > pf_ring.ko module you are using is from latest code, > if you are using packages, please remove the pfring package, manually delete > all pf_ring.ko in your system, and reinstall it to make > sure DKMS installs the new module. > > Alfredo > >> On 11 Nov 2016, at 09:53, Chandrika Gautam <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> # cat /proc/net/pf_ring/info >> PF_RING Version : 6.5.0 (unknown) >> Total rings : 0 >> >> Standard (non ZC) Options >> Ring slots : 409600 >> Slot version : 16 >> Capture TX : No [RX only] >> IP Defragment : No >> Socket Mode : Standard >> Cluster Fragment Queue : 0 >> Cluster Fragment Discard : 0 >> >> Regards, >> Gautam >> >> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>> On 11 Nov 2016, at 07:29, Chandrika Gautam <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Alfredo, >>> >>> I tested with latest pfring from github but still packets are segregated to >>> different applications. >> >> Please provide me the output of "cat /proc/net/pf_ring/info" >> >>> After your latest change, We need to use cluster_per_flow_2_tuple only >>> right to segregate traffic on outer ip addresses ? >> >> Correct >> >>> Should we load pfring module with enable_frag_coherence=1? I have tested >>> with using this or without this with the latest package from github. >> >> enable_frag_coherence is set to 1 by default >> >> Alfredo >> >>> >>> >>> Regrads, >>> Gautam >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Chandrika Gautam >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>> Thanks Alfredo for an update. >>> I will update you once merge with latest >>> PFRing. >>> Regards, >>> Gautam >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Nov 10, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Gautam >>>> your traffic is GTP traffic and the hash was computed on the inner headers >>>> when present, >>>> I did change the behaviour computing the hash on the outer header when >>>> using cluster_per_flow_2_tuple, and introduced >>>> new hash types cluster_per_inner_* for computing hash on inner header, >>>> when present. >>>> Please update from github or wait for new packages. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Alfredo >>>> >>>>> On 10 Nov 2016, at 11:41, Chandrika Gautam <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> PFA the traces having vlan and not vlan. >>>>> >>>>> To add more details to this, there are 2 observations - >>>>> 1. We ran a bigger file of 1 lakh packets, out of which fragments of same >>>>> packet got distributed across application >>>>> >>>>> 2. We ran with the attached file and observed that the 2 packets were >>>>> going to one application and rest of the packets were to other one. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks & Regards >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano >>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> Hi Gautam >>>>> could you provide a pcap we can use to reproduce this? >>>>> >>>>> Alfredo >>>>> >>>>> > On 10 Nov 2016, at 11:22, Chandrika Gautam >>>>> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > Hi, >>>>> > >>>>> > We are using PFRING cluster feature and using cluster_2_tuple and 2 >>>>> > applications >>>>> > are reading from same cluster id. >>>>> > >>>>> > We have observed that the packets having same source and destination ip >>>>> > addresses are getting distributed across 2 applications which has >>>>> > completely tossed our logic as we are trying to assemble the fragments >>>>> > in our applications. >>>>> > >>>>> > Is there any bug in PFRING clustering mechanism which is causing this. >>>>> > >>>>> > Using PFRING 6.2.0 and pfring is loaded with below command - >>>>> > insmod pf_ring.ko min_num_slots=409600 enable_tx_capture=0 >>>>> > >>>>> > I tried with this also. >>>>> > insmod pf_ring.ko min_num_slots=409600 enable_tx_capture=0 >>>>> > enable_frag_coherence=1 >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Regards, >>>>> > Gautam >>>>> > >>>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>>> > Ntop-misc mailing list >>>>> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> > http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc >>>>> > <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list >>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc >>>>> <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc> >>>>> >>>>> <multiple_fragments_id35515.pcap><multiple_fragments_id35515_wo_vlan.pcap>_______________________________________________ >>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list >>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc >>>>> <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ntop-misc mailing list >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc >>>> <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ntop-misc mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc >>> <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ntop-misc mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc >> <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ntop-misc mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc >> <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc> > > _______________________________________________ > Ntop-misc mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc > <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
