[Oisf-users] Suricata 4.0.3 with Napatech problems

[Steve Castellarin]

And also, the bandwidth utilization was just over 800Mbps.

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Steve Castellarin <
steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Peter,
>
> Those changes didn't help.  Around 23+ minutes into the run one worker CPU
> (#30) stayed at 100% while buffer NT11 dropped packets and would not
> recover.  I'm attaching a zip file that has the stats.log for that run, the
> suricata.log file as well as the information seen at the command line after
> issuing "/usr/bin/suricata -vvv -c /etc/suricata/suricata.yaml --napatech
> --runmode workers -D".
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:30 AM, Steve Castellarin <
> steve.castellarin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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/20180118/9ca1c09d/attachment-0002.html>