Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: One NIC on public side
From: Kevin Cullimore <kcullimo () runbox com>
Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 03:25:07 -0400
On 5/14/2010 12:05 AM, mike () grounded net wrote:
If it didn't have any connectivity at all, could it have been a speed mismatch?That's what it was. For some reason, the new system doesn't like the hub and moving the connection to a switch, and using port mirroring is working.
On Thu, 13 May 2010 19:58:59 +0200, Boonie wrote:The other option is to attach the hub to the span port and attach themonitor devices from there. You allready have the equipment for that. This does not interfere with the normal trafic and if your monitoring PC isnot sending and data (reverse dns queries?) there should also be no collisions.Dave ----- Original Message -----From:<mike () grounded net> To: "wireshark-users"<wireshark-users () wireshark org> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 6:52 PM Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] One NIC on public sideAre you sure you want tu run all traffic through a hub? This might lead to packetloss due to colissions.It's a temporary setup so that we can get a number of services going right. So far, we don't see any packet loss or terrible quality loss and we're even passing voip calls through the setup. We were using a switch with port monitoring but because we had multiple devices which needed to monitor the traffic, we ended up using a hub for now.The setup I'm talking about is... WAN-Routers----Hub----Firewall----switches----etc The wireshark and other monitoring systems are connected to the Hub. ___________________________________________________________________________Sent via: Wireshark-users mailing list<wireshark-users () wireshark org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users mailto:wireshark-users-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-users mailing list<wireshark-users () wireshark org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users mailto:wireshark-users-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users () wireshark org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users mailto:wireshark-users-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- Re: One NIC on public side, (continued)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side Gianluca Varenni (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side Boonie (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side Boonie (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 13)
- Re: One NIC on public side Kevin Cullimore (May 15)
- Re: One NIC on public side Richard Bejtlich (May 15)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 15)
- Re: One NIC on public side Boonie (May 16)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 19)
- Re: One NIC on public side Martin Visser (May 16)
- Re: One NIC on public side Richard Bejtlich (May 17)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 19)
- Re: One NIC on public side Marc Luethi (May 19)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 19)
- Re: One NIC on public side mike () grounded net (May 19)