Hi Chris
inline

> On 22 Apr 2015, at 13:24, Christiaan Schade 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Alfredo,
> 
> Thanks! I can confirm that the fix is working.
> 
> P.S. could you give me some more information on the rationale behind removing 
> transparent mode?
>  - Why is it removed?

transparent_mode does not have major performance improvements on recent 
kernels, that’s why we decided to remove it. 

>  - Is it now always transparent mode 0? (Looking at the diff this seems to be 
> the case)

Yes

>  - Is there an impact on performance?

Same performance.

> 
> We were already running in transparent mode 0 all the time, so I'm just 
> wondering if anything has changed that I should be aware of. The commit 
> message / documentation is a little scarce on these
> things ;)

Sorry about that :-)

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris

Regards
Alfredo

> 
> On 04/18/2015 05:53 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano wrote:
>> Hi Christiaan
>> there is a patch in SVN for this, please update and let us know,
>> in essence kernel is stripping out the first VLAN tag, now pf_ring is 
>> pushing it back.
>> 
>> Alfredo
>> 
>>> On 15 Apr 2015, at 15:50, Christiaan Schade 
>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
>>> <mailto:[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I did forget some other important information:
>>> Driver:
>>> igb-5.2.5-zc
>>> 
>>> $ethtool -k eth4
>>> Offload parameters for eth4:
>>> rx-checksumming: on
>>> tx-checksumming: on
>>> scatter-gather: on
>>> tcp-segmentation-offload: on
>>> udp-fragmentation-offload: off
>>> generic-segmentation-offload: on
>>> generic-receive-offload: on
>>> large-receive-offload: off
>>> rx-vlan-offload: off
>>> tx-vlan-offload: off
>>> ntuple-filters: off
>>> receive-hashing: on
>>> 
>>> I also tried
>>> rx-vlan-offload: on
>>> tx-vlan-offload: on
>>> 
>>> with no difference
>>> 
>>> On 04/15/2015 03:23 PM, Christiaan Schade wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> I think this issue might be related to r8710 (fix for hw vlan strip in 
>>>> case of multiple sockets on the same device).
>>>> I've attached two PCAP files: ip_two_vlan.pcap and pfdump.pcap where 
>>>> pfdump.pcap is the result of 'pfsend -f ip_two_vlan.pcap' and 'pfdump -w 
>>>> pfdump.pcap' between two servers.
>>>> 
>>>> The result is that the first (out of two) VLAN tag is stripped out in 
>>>> pfdump.pcap.
>>>> 
>>>> == Additional info ==
>>>> - Using PF_RING 6.0.2, both VLAN tags are stripped out (i.e. there are no 
>>>> more VLAN tags in pfdump.pcap). My guess is that r8710 attempts to fix 
>>>> this issue (I have not verified if the problem exists
>>>> in r8709).
>>>> - Using r9212, only the first VLAN tag is stripped out
>>>> - Using r9212, packets with 1 VLAN tag are processed correctly (if I 
>>>> pfsend the pfdump.pcap it still has 1 VLAN tag after receiving it. Also 
>>>> verified with other PCAPs with only 1 VLAN tag)
>>>> 
>>>> Other tests performed:
>>>> | Source    | Destination | Result      |
>>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>> | pfsend    | pfdump      | 1 VLAN tag  |
>>>> | tcpreplay | pfdump      | 1 VLAN tag  |
>>>> | tcpreplay | tcpdump     | 2 VLAN tags |
>>>> | pfsend    | tcpdump     | 2 VLAN tags |
>>>> 
>>>> PF_RING at destination (where pfdump runs):
>>>> 
>>>> $ cat /proc/net/pf_ring/info
>>>> PF_RING Version          : 6.0.3 ($Revision: 9212$)
>>>> Total rings              : 0
>>>> 
>>>> Standard (non DNA/ZC) Options
>>>> Ring slots               : 4096
>>>> Slot version             : 16
>>>> Capture TX               : Yes [RX+TX]
>>>> IP Defragment            : No
>>>> Socket Mode              : Standard
>>>> Total plugins            : 0
>>>> Cluster Fragment Queue   : 0
>>>> Cluster Fragment Discard : 0
>>>> 
>>>> uname -a at destination (where pfdump runs):
>>>> $ uname -a
>>>> Linux sm-advantech-01 3.13.0-32-generic #57~precise1-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jul 15 
>>>> 03:51:20 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>>>> 
>>>> [Side note] I see that transparent_mode is now deprecated, does this mean 
>>>> that from 6.0.3 on PF_RING is always in transparent mode 0?
>>>> 
>>>> If I'm missing any important information please let me know, I'd be happy 
>>>> to run any further tests to assist you in understanding the problem
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>> 
>>>> Christiaan Schade
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
>>>> <mailto:[email protected] 
>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc 
>>>> <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc>
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ATTENTION:
>>> The information in this email message is confidential and may be legally
>>> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee.
>>> 
>>> Should you receive this message by mistake, you are hereby notified that
>>> any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or use of this
>>> message is prohibited and may be unlawful.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
>>> <mailto:[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc 
>>> <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>> 
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ATTENTION:
> The information in this email message is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee.
> 
> Should you receive this message by mistake, you are hereby notified that
> any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or use of this
> message is prohibited and may be unlawful.
> _______________________________________________
> 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