Maybe maybe not ... it really all depends on how both systems (Cisco and
ntop) see the traffic.

WRT Cisco, I don't know for sure.  But I highly doubt the article on SPAN is
less than accurate.  If anything, it may understate the cases where you see
duplicates.

WRT ntop, I've got a lot more confidence.

ntop sees packets.  There NO (zip, nada, none) comparison of ANY packet with
any previous or future packet, except for a little fragment reassembly.

So if you SPAN it and it's on the wire twice, ntop counts it twice.

One of my clients puts a full view of their traffic out a single SPAN
ports - but they're using 7000 series systems and have a lot more power than
the lower end systems including the ability to put packet level filters on
the SPANs.

But even that won't help YOUR problem.

-----Burton


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Markus Rehbach
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 5:00 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Ntop] How to avoid 'hardware duplicates' using span/mirror
> ports?
>
>
> Retransmissions will have other IP IDs for it. This objection
> seems to be not
> valid for me.
>
> Mirror artifacts could happen but the things I mentioned are
> switch mirror
> locics duplicating the packets. And the probability of the
> artifacts are zero
> in contrast to the duplicates by method. The result must be much
> better to
> filter these hardware duplicates.
>
> IP fragments will have the same IP ID but if you are using e.g.
>
> pkt_part = (*(pkt_data + 0x12)<<24) + (*(pkt_data + 0x13)<<16) +
> (*(pkt_data +
> 0x28)<<8) + *(pkt_data + 0x29)
>
> for comparison whether 2 fragments are the same (0x12 and 0x13
> for the IP ID
> and 0x28 and 0x29 for the lower 2 bytes of the seq nr) there must be the
> inprobable case that bytes 28 and 29 are equal (in the search
> array of say
> 100 packets) to define these fragments as hardware duplicates spuriously.
> Despite the fact that we have 0.01% IP fragments in our net maximum.
>
> That's a bit fuzzy. But often it is very handy to mirror a
> complete VLAN or a
> bunch of servers and get statistics from it as a whole. And the hardware
> duplicates are problematic in doing so. And a fast filter would
> be helpful.
>
> No hard feelings;-)
>
> Markus
>
> P.S.: SOL the beer no shit I got it!
>
> On Tuesday 20 April 2004 21:55, Burton M. Strauss III wrote:
> > You're SOL.  Unless you're doing full connection tracking, like the
> > end-points are, there's no way to tell.
> >
> > Remember - those could be legit retransmits (only the receiver knows the
> > last byte number it received).  Could be legit retransmits (if
> the ack was
> > lost, only the source knows what it's sent last).
> >
> > Or they could be SPAN port artifacts.
> >
> > Or both.
> >
> > The end-points manage this by simple byte # counters.  Nobody else even
> > tries, because - as you've found out - it's a memory vacuum.
> >
> > Read up on the problems re fragment reassembly in IDSes and assume it's
> > worse...
> >
> > -----Burton
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> > > Markus Rehbach
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 1:45 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: [Ntop] How to avoid 'hardware duplicates' using span/mirror
> > > ports?
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > perhaps not 100% on topic here but I'm sure there are a lot of
> > > readers with
> > > more knowledge than me concerning this issue.
> > >
> > > Problem: The measurement method is producing hardware
> duplicates. In my
> > > scenario these packets are not wanted, because these packets will
> > > destroy the
> > > correctness of the traffic volumes for e.g. a group of
> servers. The are
> > > primarily characterized having the same ip id and the same
> tcp sequence
> > > number (tcptrace is identifying the duplicates that way). Most of
> > > the time
> > > the packets are following each other or are having a small
> gap between.
> > >
> > > References: from
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/
> > products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008007e6fa.html :
> >
> > "Duplicate Traffic
> >
> > In some configurations, SPAN sends multiple copies of the same
> > source traffic
> > to the destination port. For example, in a configuration with a
> > bidirectional
> > SPAN session (both ingress and egress) for two SPAN sources,
> > called s1 and
> > s2, to a SPAN destination port, called d1, if a packet enters the switch
> > through s1 and is sent for egress from the switch to s2, ingress
> > SPAN at s1
> > sends a copy of the packet to SPAN destination d1 and egress SPAN
> > at s2 sends
> > a copy of the packet to SPAN destination d1. If the packet was Layer 2
> > switched from s1 to s2, both SPAN packets would be the same. If
> > the packet
> > was Layer 3 switched from s1 to s2, the Layer-3 rewrite would alter the
> > source and destination Layer 2 addresses, in which case the SPAN packets
> > would be different. "
> >
> > Affected should be bidirectional RSPANs and VSPANs on Cisco
> > switches. Nortel
> > Passport 8600 have a similar 'problem' while bidirectional
> > mirroring ports
> > n:1. I'm quite sure other switches will produce these hardware
> > duplicates.
> >
> > Solution: ?.
> >
> > Is anybody out there who solved this problem? My first thought
> > was to write a
> > genereric filter for it but I stalled at the point I was thinking about
a
> > suitable fast data structure for it.... naively I would take a
> > array of fixed
> > size....
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Markus
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ntop mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ntop mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop

_______________________________________________
Ntop mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop

_______________________________________________
Ntop mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop

Reply via email to