[Snort-users] RE : Re: RE : Re: high packet loss - low throughput

rmkml rmkml at ...1855...
Fri Jul 19 09:27:54 EDT 2013


Thx Michal, 

But can you explain little bit more your answers please? 

Do you have tested bpf ? Top results ? Snort drop ? How ?

3500 rules is high, can you run only with recommended rulesets please?  ( Around 500 - 1000 rules)

Can you run in IDS or IPS/inline mode?

Can you try without pfring ?

Snort verbose output provide packet size statistics and network trafic repartition... please send.

Maybe you have many small packet size? Udp ? Gtp ?

Regards
@Rmkml



-------- Message d'origine --------
De : Michal Purzynski <michal at ...16244...> 
Date :  
A : rmkml <rmkml at ...1855...> 
Cc : Snort-users <snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net> 
Objet : Re: RE : Re: [Snort-users] high packet loss - low throughput 
 
On 7/19/13 2:32 PM, rmkml wrote:
Hi Michal,

Sorry if I don't followed your all answers, 

What's cpu if you run all snort with "special" bpf for testing interrupt/network driver/pfring please? (Bpf like "tcp port 79")
Send top result ?

It's in this email already.
Can you run a snort output statistics after one minute please?  After 5mn ?
Sure, snort takes no more than 20-40% CPU, with a short spikes.

It's a new snort install or It's a snort upgrade? What cpu previously?
New install.

What's os you use please?  Tunning? Sysctl ?
Nothing.

What's cpu if you run all snort without bpf and without rules/module please? 

Can you replace snort by tcpdump only for testing?  Cpu results?
Errr?

Regards
@Rmkml





-------- Message d'origine --------
De : Michal Purzynski <michal at ...16244...> 
Date : 
A : snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net 
Objet : Re: [Snort-users] high packet loss - low throughput 


So, anyone got some ideas how to debug and improve the situation? Or 
should I just assume that snort isn't capable of handling a per process 
30Mbit - I can see a 5% packet loss now.

On 7/18/13 11:07 AM, Michal Purzynski wrote:
> On 7/18/13 3:39 AM, waldo kitty wrote:
>> On 7/17/2013 17:25, Michal Purzynski wrote:
>>> On 7/17/13 11:01 PM, waldo kitty wrote:
>>>> On 7/17/2013 16:04, Michal Purzynski wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I can see a strange results on a local snort installation. Either I
>>>>> don't understand something or the statistics aren't precise. 
>>>>> Please help
>>>>> me understand.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's an (expanding) two hosts snort setup with 2 x E5-2620 0 @ 
>>>>> 2.00GHz /
>>>>> 64GB RAM each.
>>>>> Intel x520 card.
>>>>> Traffic is around 1Gbit to each host.
>>>>> Around 3500 VRT only rules enabled.
>>>>> 8 snort instances load balanced by the pf_ring.
>>>> what else is this machine doing besides just snorting the traffic?
>>> netsniff-ng, barnyard, snort and that's it. Part of a Security Onion,
>>> but with most things (like Bro, argus, prads, etc) disabled.
>>>>> The traffic loss is very high - up to 9% per instance (as reported by
>>>>> Sguil which in turn read the snort logs and debug files). A single
>>>>> instance gets from 90 - 150Mbits of traffic and from 10 - 20k pps. To
>>>>> make it worse, the loss is not dependent on the traffic and/or pps at
>>>>> all. Actualy, sometimes I get a 5% of loss on 50Mbits to a single 
>>>>> instance.
>>>> what happens if you increase the number of snort instances which 
>>>> would thereby
>>>> reduce the load on each of the instances?
>>> I did it increasing from 6 to 8. And it won't help, really - if snort
>>> cannot keep up with 50Mbit / instance stream...
>> i'm not sure that it is snort, specifically... there is something 
>> causing the
>> data to be flushed or lost before it has a chance to be processed... 
>> there are
>> others running snort on pipes as large or larger...
>>
>> perhaps you are using protocol aware stream flushing and it needs 
>> tweaking?
> Yes, it's enabled with the same settings. Reading about it and I don't 
> really want to disable it.
>>
>> ###############################################
>> # Configure protocol aware flushing
>> # For more information see README.stream5
>> ###############################################
>> config paf_max: 16000
>>
>>
>> it may also be related to the timeout values in the stream5 settings??
>>
>>
> No idea, that's why asking here :) Everything is default.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See everything from the browser to the database with AppDynamics
Get end-to-end visibility with application monitoring from AppDynamics
Isolate bottlenecks and diagnose root cause in seconds.
Start your free trial of AppDynamics Pro today!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48808831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Snort-users mailing list
Snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net
Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-users
Snort-users list archive:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=snort-users

Please visit http://blog.snort.org to stay current on all the latest Snort news!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.snort.org/pipermail/snort-users/attachments/20130719/b788eb4d/attachment.html>


More information about the Snort-users mailing list