Hello, Amir! I suggest you switch to hardware NIC level filtering rules from ethtool interface directly: https://github.com/FastVPSEestiOu/fastnetmon/wiki/Traffic-filtration-using-NIC-capabilities-on-wire-speed-(10GE,-14Mpps)
Because it works on wire speed and has zero cost for cpu resources. On Sunday, April 5, 2015, Amir Kaduri <akadur...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I think I've made some progress: AFAIU, the packets that I see despite the > rule that supposed to filter them, are packets the receive during the time > interval from rule-set to rule-apply by pfring. > I'll appreciate getting some answers about the following: > 1. If I use the pfring_purge_idle_hash_rules(..) API, is there any way to > know which rules-ids are set and which are vacant? > This is because I have to follow the rules-ids when setting them, but > when I purge them, I don't know which of them were removed. > 2. Does this API also purges HW rules? > 3. According to the documentation, I know that HW rules have a limit of > 32,000. What is the limit for hash rules? IS this limit includes the 32,000 > of the HW, or additional to it? > 4. I have a valid rule, but whenever I > call pfring_get_hash_filtering_rule_stats(..), it fails.Any idea why? > - I've add the stats code to the pfcount_82599 tester > - In /var/log/messages I see the following message that is probably > originated from ring_setsockopt(): "kernel: [PF_RING] Found rule but > pluginId 0 is not registered" > > Thanks, > Amir > > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Amir Kaduri <akadur...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','akadur...@gmail.com');>> wrote: > >> Hi Alfredo, >> >> Thanks for referring to my question. >> I hope the following answers: >> >> [root@CT10K10G]# cat /etc/pf_ring/pfring.conf >> min_num_slots=1024 transparent_mode=2 enable_frag_coherence=1 >> enable_ip_defrag=1 >> >> [root@CT10K10G]# cat /proc/net/pf_ring/info >> PF_RING Version : 6.0.1 ($Revision: exported$) >> Total rings : 0 >> >> Standard (non DNA) Options >> Ring slots : 1024 >> Slot version : 15 >> Capture TX : Yes [RX+TX] >> IP Defragment : Yes >> Socket Mode : Standard >> Transparent mode : No [mode 2] >> Total plugins : 0 >> Cluster Fragment Queue : 0 >> Cluster Fragment Discard : 0 >> >> Thanks, >> Amir >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigli...@ntop.org >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cardigli...@ntop.org');>> wrote: >> >>> Hi Amir >>> how did you load pf_ring.ko? Can I see the command line? >>> Please also try using latest code from svn, this helps us debugging the >>> issue. >>> >>> Br >>> Alfredo >>> >>> On 01 Apr 2015, at 18:22, Amir Kaduri <akadur...@gmail.com >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','akadur...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> I’m using PF_RING-6.0.1. >>> >>> I’m trying to develop an application that runs some algorithm consisting >>> on rules. >>> >>> I made some tests using the “pfcount” tester, and unfortunately, I don’t >>> understand the behavior: >>> >>> I’m running the following command line: “./pfcount -i eth3 -u 2 -v 1 -r >>> –m” which AFAIU, adds a wildcard filter for each incoming packet. >>> >>> If I get it correctly, once a rule was added, I should not expect other >>> packets of the same session to receive, and this is not what I’m getting. >>> >>> For example: >>> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> [root@CT10K10G examples]# ./pfcount -i eth3 -u 2 -v 1 -r -m >>> >>> Adding wildcard filtering rules >>> >>> Using PF_RING v.6.0.1 >>> >>> Capturing from eth3 [00:E0:ED:FE:18:19][ifIndex: 11] >>> >>> # Device RX channels: 6 >>> >>> # Polling threads: 1 >>> >>> Dumping statistics on /proc/net/pf_ring/stats/11993-eth3.1074 >>> >>> 18:52:35.956295950 [RX][if_index=11][00:08:E3:FF:FC:C8 -> >>> 00:01:02:03:04:05] [vlan 70] [direction 1] [IPv4][10.61.10.9:52311 -> >>> 10.70.150.108:60189] >>> [l3_proto=TCP][hash=344283189][tos=0][tcp_seq_num=596843063] >>> [caplen=128][len=1522][parsed_header_len=0][eth_offset=-14][l3_offset=18][l4_offset=38][payload_offset=58] >>> >>> Rule 0 added successfully... >>> >>> 18:52:35.956301616 [RX][if_index=11][00:08:E3:FF:FC:C8 -> >>> 00:01:02:03:04:05] [vlan 70] [direction 1] [IPv4][10.61.10.9:52311 -> >>> 10.70.150.108:60189] >>> [l3_proto=TCP][hash=344283189][tos=0][tcp_seq_num=596844523] >>> [caplen=128][len=650][parsed_header_len=0][eth_offset=-14][l3_offset=18][l4_offset=38][payload_offset=58] >>> >>> Rule 1 added successfully... >>> >>> 18:52:35.956303262 [RX][if_index=11][00:08:E3:FF:FC:C8 -> >>> 00:01:02:03:04:05] [vlan 70] [direction 1] [IPv4][10.61.10.9:52311 -> >>> 10.70.150.108:60189] >>> [l3_proto=TCP][hash=344283189][tos=0][tcp_seq_num=596845111] >>> [caplen=128][len=1086][parsed_header_len=0][eth_offset=-14][l3_offset=18][l4_offset=38][payload_offset=58] >>> >>> Rule 2 added successfully... >>> >>> : >>> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> How come, that once rule #0 was added for [10.61.10.9:52311 -> >>> 10.70.150.108:60189], I still see such packets in the next lines? >>> Shouldn’t they be filtered by the rule that just as added? >>> >>> >>> (BTW, when I use the command “./pfcount -i eth3 -u 1 -v 1 -r –m” (i.e. >>> –u is 1 rather than 2), the tester uses hash filters, and in this case, I >>> get errors: >>> >>> 18:53:19.052549112 [RX][if_index=11][00:08:E3:FF:FC:C8 -> >>> 00:01:02:03:04:05] [vlan 70] [direction 1] [IPv4][10.61.10.9:52311 -> >>> 10.70.150.108:60189] >>> [l3_proto=TCP][hash=344283189][tos=0][tcp_seq_num=596847159] >>> [caplen=128][len=1490][parsed_header_len=0][eth_offset=-14][l3_offset=18][l4_offset=38][payload_offset=58] >>> >>> pfring_add_hash_filtering_rule(1) failed) >>> >>> >>> Any help will be appreciated. >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Amir >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ntop-misc mailing list >>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it');> >>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ntop-misc mailing list >>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it');> >>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc >>> >> >> > -- Sincerely yours, Pavel Odintsov
_______________________________________________ Ntop-misc mailing list Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
