I tried with above. I found the same result one instance of pfcount
receiving 2 packets and 6 in other instance for the file shared
multiple_fragments_id35515_wo_vlan.pcap.

Are you receiving all 6 packets in one pfcount instance ?

Regards,
Chandrika

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
> 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 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]
> > 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]>
>> 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]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 11 Nov 2016, at 07:29, Chandrika Gautam <
>>> [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]> 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]>
>>>> 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]> 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]> 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]> 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]
>>>>> > http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <multiple_fragments_id35515.pcap><multiple_fragments_id35515
>>>> _wo_vlan.pcap>_______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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