Actually I'd love suggestions on that front too.
I've looked at Splunk, Graylog, and Zabbix all pretty recently. None of
them really excited me to be honest.
Splunk had the interesting ability to automatically indicate messages
that were statistically normal....it just seemed like there was a lot
going on and a lot features I would never use.
I don't really know what my criteria are for the perfect log
collector/analyzer, I just don't think I've seen it yet :)
------ Original Message ------
From: "Faisal Imtiaz" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: 12/28/2016 12:28:20 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik - Carrier Grade NAT methods
yes... which leads back to a full circle on another aspect of
ISP/NSP/WISP systems...
Centralized Syslog
with / easy access to retrieve info..
Lots of desired functionality, Monitoring, DDOS, logging etc etc would
lead back to a centralized logging system.
:)
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 11:26:39 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik - Carrier Grade NAT methods
Yeah, DHCP lease info is the thing to save.
From:Adam Moffett
Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 9:21 AM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik - Carrier Grade NAT methods
I think Eric is saying if you're going to the effort of logging NAT
translations then you also should log DHCP assignments. Which is
true.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Dennis Burgess" <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: 12/28/2016 5:50:22 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik - Carrier Grade NAT methods
But this is not required.. Something of course, you can do.
Dennis Burgess
www.linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 x103 – [email protected]
From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2016 8:01 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik - Carrier Grade NAT methods
Assuming you have a NAT and dhcp pools of IPs defined inside the NAT,
unique pool per POP, if you do not have log files from your dhcp
daemon, you are taking a terrible risk... Log files are small
relative to the cost of disk space. In setups I have built in the
past with the ISC dhcpd we kept logs going back 24 months for which
CPE at which MAC address had which IP address (whether internal or an
ARIN IP) at any given point in time, including the lease/assignment
handshake.
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]>
wrote:
The problem I see with that though, is the subpoenas we've gotten
are generally just an IP address, and a time period... if this is
coming from something like, say, a facebook post, is there typically
going to be any log of that sort of thing?
Assigning port blocks would work fine for things like bittorrent
DMCA takedown notices, where they give you port information, but I'm
not sure how you would use it to track down a specific customer when
all they give you is the IP address...
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Josh Reynolds
<[email protected]> wrote:
If you assign a port block per customer (PBA NAT in Juniper), you
don't really need to log anything... do you?
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]>
wrote:
> A recent thread about a subpoena made me wonder. Historically
this hasn't
> been an issue for me because I've had access to enough public
IP's...but it
> might become an issue soon.
>
> Has anybody set up CGN with appropriate logging on Mikrotik?
> I'm thinking you would have to log every set of src-ip, dst-ip,
src-port,
> and dst-port for each connection that a customer opens. Does
simply
> checking the "log" checkbox on the srcnat rule generate enough
data or is
> there more to it?
>
> Has anybody tried the method on the wiki
>
(http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:IP/Firewall/NAT#Carrier-Grade_NAT_.28CGNAT.29_or_NAT444)
> where you assign a range of port numbers to each private IP? The
idea is
> you don't have to log everything at that point because you know
that a
> connection from port x corresponds to private ip y. Then you
just need to
> keep track of who has which private IP. It seems like this would
have a
> side effect of limiting the number of simultaneous connections a
single
> customer could open....maybe not a bad thing.
>
> Thanks,
> Adam
