Re: high packet loss - low throughput

[Joel Esler <jesler () sourcefire com>]

If Snort sees traffic more than once, it will analyze it as many times as it sees it. 

The SSL preprocessing should discard an ignore a session after it determines the legitimate certificate exchange,
But like I said, it sounds like there is something else going on here. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 21, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Michal Purzynski <michal () rsbac org> wrote:

> On 7/21/13 2:03 PM, Joel Esler wrote:
> > Yes, performance that low seems incorrect. I don't think it's Snort with numbers that low. 
> Also, a question for the more experienced. I have a simple setup - load balancers in front of everything, doing L7 
> and terminating SSL. Snort gets a copy of all the traffic and that means it can see:
> 1. traffic from Internet to load balancers
> 2. traffic from LB to the backend servers
> 3. traffic from the backend to LB 
> 4. traffic from the LB to the Internet
>
> It's clear it can see the same traffic twice, sometimes enrypted sometimes decrypted (SSL preprocessor enabled, so 
> the encrypted traffic is being ignored).
>
> Question: does it make sense to leave it like this or should I only direct the "internal" traffic to snort? You know, 
> the one between the LB <-> backend?
>
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Jul 21, 2013, at 6:16 AM, Michal Purzynski <michal () rsbac org> wrote:
> >
> > > On 7/21/13 2:22 AM, Joel Esler wrote:
> > > > On Jul 20, 2013, at 6:46 PM, Michal Purzynski <michal () rsbac org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The sourcefire company claims to achieve 1Gbit/sec per CPU core. I find 
> > > > > it actualy hard to believe as the "empty" snort used to do around 
> > > > > 250-300Mbit/sec per core here. Empty as in no rules at all.
> > > >
> > > > Even more.  But we have a dedicated appliance specifically tuned with special drivers to run Snort very fast.  You 
> > > > are doing this, I assume on commodity hardware, on a stock OS, running many things (Security Onion)
> > > Not really, SO is so wonderful you can enable and disable functionality on demand, and so I've done. The box is 
> > > running snort and netsniff-ng only, has around 20 processes of snort (24 execution threads with HT enabled).
> > >
> > > Still - 45Mbit/sec per instance with packet loss is disappointing. And 100 would be too.
> > >
> > > Also, I'm running Intel and pf_ring, can try a Myricom (and not pf_ring). I won't try anything more expensive like 
> > > FPGA accelerated cards, since I find them too limited and having no real advantage over Myricom and a lot of 
> > > downsides.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 () 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!