[Oisf-users] Suricata 4.0.3 with Napatech problems

[Steve Castellarin]

We never see above 2Gbps.  When the issue occurred a little bit ago I was
running the Napatech "monitoring" tool and it was saying we were between
650-900Mbps.  I'll note the bandwidth utilization when the next issue
occurs.

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Peter Manev <petermanev at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 5:27 PM, Steve Castellarin
> <steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > When you mean the "size of the traffic", are you asking what the
> bandwidth
> > utilization is at the time the issue begins?
>
> Sorry - i mean the traffic you sniff - 1/5/10...Gbps ?
>
> >
> > I will set things up and send you any/all output after the issue starts.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:17 AM, Peter Manev <petermanev at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 4:43 PM, Steve Castellarin
> >> <steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hey Peter,
> >> >
> >> > I tried as you asked.  Less than 15 minutes after I restarted
> Suricata I
> >> > saw
> >> > my first CPU hitting 100% and one host buffer dropping all packets.
> >> > Shortly
> >> > after that the second CPU hit 100% and a second host buffer began
> >> > dropping
> >> > all packets.  I'm attaching the stats.log where you'll see at 10:31:11
> >> > the
> >> > first host buffer (nt1.drop) starts to register dropped packets, then
> at
> >> > 10:31:51 you'll see host buffer nt6.drop begin to register dropped
> >> > packets.
> >> > At that point I issued the kill.
> >> >
> >>
> >> What is the size of the traffic?
> >> Can you also try
> >> detect:
> >>   - profile: high
> >>
> >> (as opposed to "custom")
> >>
> >> Also if can run it in verbose mode (-vvv)   and send me that compete
> >> output after you start having the issues.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Steve
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Peter Manev <petermanev at gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Steve Castellarin
> >> >> <steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > Hey Pete,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Here's the YAML file from the last time I attempted to run 4.0.3 -
> >> >> > with
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > network information removed.  Let me know if you need anything else
> >> >> > from
> >> >> > our
> >> >> > configuration.  I'll also go to the redmine site to open a bug
> >> >> > report.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Steve
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Steve,
> >> >>
> >> >> Can you try without -
> >> >>
> >> >>   midstream: true
> >> >>   asyn-oneside:true
> >> >> so
> >> >>   #midstream: true
> >> >>   #asyn-oneside:true
> >> >>
> >> >> and lower the "prealloc-session: 1000000" to 100 000 for example
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Thank you.
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 6:36 AM, Peter Manev <petermanev at gmail.com
> >
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 4:12 PM, Steve Castellarin
> >> >> >> <steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> > Hey Peter, I didn't know if you had a chance to look at the
> stats
> >> >> >> > log
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > configuration file I sent.  So far, running 3.1.1 with the
> updated
> >> >> >> > Napatech
> >> >> >> > drivers my system is running without any issues.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The toughest part of the troubleshooting is that i dont have the
> set
> >> >> >> up to reproduce this.
> >> >> >> I didn't see anything that could lead me to definitive conclusion
> >> >> >> from
> >> >> >> the stats log.
> >> >> >> Can you please open a bug report on our redmine with the details
> >> >> >> form
> >> >> >> this mialthread?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Would it be possible to share the suricata.yaml (privately if you
> >> >> >> would like works too; remove all networks)?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thank you
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Steve Castellarin
> >> >> >> > <steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Here is the zipped stats.log.  I restarted the Napatech drivers
> >> >> >> >> before
> >> >> >> >> running Suricata 4.0.3 to clear out any previous drop counters,
> >> >> >> >> etc.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> The first time I saw a packet drop was at the 12:20:51 mark,
> and
> >> >> >> >> you'll
> >> >> >> >> see "nt12.drop" increment.  During this time one of the CPUs
> >> >> >> >> acting
> >> >> >> >> as
> >> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> "worker" was at 100%.  But these drops recovered at the
> 12:20:58
> >> >> >> >> mark,
> >> >> >> >> where
> >> >> >> >> "nt12.drop" stays constant at 13803.  The big issue triggered
> at
> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> 12:27:05 mark in the file - where one worker CPU was stuck at
> >> >> >> >> 100%
> >> >> >> >> followed
> >> >> >> >> by packet drops in host buffer "nt3.drop".  Then came a second
> >> >> >> >> CPU
> >> >> >> >> at
> >> >> >> >> 100%
> >> >> >> >> (another "worker" CPU) and packet drops in buffer "nt2.drop" at
> >> >> >> >> 12:27:33.  I
> >> >> >> >> finally killed Suricata just before 12:27:54, where you see all
> >> >> >> >> host
> >> >> >> >> buffers
> >> >> >> >> beginning to drop packets.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I'm also including the output from the "suricata --dump-config"
> >> >> >> >> command.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Peter Manev
> >> >> >> >> <petermanev at gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Steve Castellarin
> >> >> >> >>> <steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>> > Peter, yes that is correct.  I worked for almost a couple
> >> >> >> >>> > weeks
> >> >> >> >>> > with
> >> >> >> >>> > Napatech support and they believed the Napatech setup
> >> >> >> >>> > (ntservice.ini
> >> >> >> >>> > and
> >> >> >> >>> > custom NTPL script) are working as they should.
> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> Ok.
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> One major difference between Suricata 3.x and 4.0.x in terms
> of
> >> >> >> >>> Napatech is that they did update the code, some fixes and
> >> >> >> >>> updated
> >> >> >> >>> the
> >> >> >> >>> counters.
> >> >> >> >>> There were a bunch of upgrades in Suricata too.
> >> >> >> >>> Is it possible to send over a stats.log - when the issue
> starts
> >> >> >> >>> occuring?
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 9:52 AM, Peter Manev
> >> >> >> >>> > <petermanev at gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >>> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >> I
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >> On 11 Jan 2018, at 07:19, Steve Castellarin
> >> >> >> >>> >> <steve.castellarin at gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >>> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >> After my last email yesterday I decided to go back to our
> >> >> >> >>> >> 3.1.1
> >> >> >> >>> >> install of
> >> >> >> >>> >> Suricata, with
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >> the upgraded Napatech version.  Since then I've seen no
> >> >> >> >>> >> packets
> >> >> >> >>> >> dropped
> >> >> >> >>> >> with sustained bandwidth of between 1 and 1.7Gbps.  So I'm
> >> >> >> >>> >> not
> >> >> >> >>> >> sure
> >> >> >> >>> >> what is
> >> >> >> >>> >> going on with my configuration/setup of Suricata 4.0.3.
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >> So the only thing that you changed is the upgrade of the
> >> >> >> >>> >> Napatech
> >> >> >> >>> >> drivers
> >> >> >> >>> >> ?
> >> >> >> >>> >> The Suricata config stayed the same -  you just upgraded to
> >> >> >> >>> >> 4.0.3
> >> >> >> >>> >> (from
> >> >> >> >>> >> 3.1.1) and the observed effect was - after a while all (or
> >> >> >> >>> >> most)
> >> >> >> >>> >> cpus
> >> >> >> >>> >> get
> >> >> >> >>> >> pegged at 100% - is that correct ?
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Steve Castellarin
> >> >> >> >>> >> <steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>> Hey Peter, no there is no error messages.
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>> On Jan 10, 2018 4:37 PM, "Peter Manev"
> >> >> >> >>> >>> <petermanev at gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >>> >>> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Steve Castellarin
> >> >> >> >>> >>> <steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>> >>> > Hey Peter,
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>> Are there any errors msgs in suricata.log when that
> happens
> >> >> >> >>> >>> ?
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>> Thank you
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>> --
> >> >> >> >>> >>> Regards,
> >> >> >> >>> >>> Peter Manev
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> --
> >> >> >> >>> Regards,
> >> >> >> >>> Peter Manev
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Regards,
> >> >> >> Peter Manev
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >> Peter Manev
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >> Peter Manev
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Peter Manev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openinfosecfoundation.org/pipermail/oisf-users/attachments/20180118/a8b9b60c/attachment-0002.html>