On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:45 AM, Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us> wrote:
> Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:30:19PM CEST, j...@mojatatu.com wrote:
>>On 16-10-13 08:10 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 01:49:07PM CEST, j...@mojatatu.com wrote:
>>> > On 16-10-13 04:48 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> > Roopa, did you mean eth1 as the new device or did you mean just in
>>> > general config requiring a device to be specified or did you mean a new
>>> > cpu netdev being needed? I couldnt tell from the patch.
>>> You just have to have some netdev to use to funnel the IFE headered
>>> sample skbs to userspace. A dummy or a tap.
>>I see.
>>So with nflog you get basically a backend using a netlink socket
>>but in your case you will redirect to tuntap for the case of local
>>sflow but some other device for remote? I am assuming using dummy
>>would require a packet socket as means of retrieving the data.
> Correct. The idea is that the userspace app would create a tap device,
> setup the sampling packets to be sent there and recieve them
> over chardev. Or the remote delivery could be use to push the sampling
> packet to a remote host.
>>If you take the structuring of the metadata that nflog uses it should
>>be easy to transpose.
> Yes, we do it with IFE, this patchset implements that.
>>To Roopa's point, however: Would it not make sense to support nflog
>>(in addition?).

[sorry responding to all conversations so far here]

using ife for delivery of sampled packets to remote is a good option
to have if you have users.
so far I have seen agents collecting samples locally and have their
own protocol to ship them
to a collector (example sflow). Just bringing that up so that we don't
optimize for the less common case
and make the common case difficult to use :).

In my conversations with the sflow people (founders) and others,
netlink as a mechanism for sampled packet
delivery (similar to ulog/nflog) has proven useful and they see it as
a great API to standardize on going forward (Given they are
already using netlink for collecting other samples like stats etc).
something to thing about.
The people I know collecting samples are happy with having netfilter.
agreed that tc already has an existing hw
offload mechanism. and I was not suggesting giving up on tc either.

and also to jiri, agree, I don't think logging from the driver is a
good option. I was merely suggesting
having a similar option without the need for a new collector device.

The three steps in the patch series to collect samples + a device
seems a bit heavy weight.
but, if you think you have users for it, sure. having multiple api's
is also an option.
But api's come with a cost of maintaining them for ever.

Reply via email to