From: Oumer Teyeb <oumer@cpk.auc.dk>
To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Tcpdump and libipq
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 09:20:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F865DA4.8020104@cpk.auc.dk> (raw)
Hi,
I have posted this question some days ago without being a member of the
mailing list, and I don't think it has been posted. Now that I am a
member, hopefully it will be sent this time:-)
I have a program that uses libipq to delay and drop packets, so that the
transmission will be affected as if the connection is a wireless
network. It works fine. My intention was to use tcpdump in conjunction
with my program to see exactly when the packets are arriving, and then
use tcptrace to plot the graphs. But as libipq is working at the netlink
socket layer, I am doubting that when a packet reaches my firewall, it
will alreay be registerd by tcpdump.
For example, I set my program to delay every packet arriving from port
xx 100 msec. I also run tcpdump in the background to sniff on the same
flow. Say a packet arrives at 0.000 in my network card, and it was
delayed 100 msec by my program and sent to upper layers. Will Tcpdump
register the packet arrival time as 0.000 or as 100 ? I will try to
check it myself, but if anyone knows, that will save me some time.
I try to save the data whenever I get it from ip_get_packet, and then
compared it with the tcpdump I did at the same time. For the test runs,
I was delaying every packet by one sec (both incoming and outgoing).
Then I did an FTP session, and I have a very perplexing result:
There is a 1 second diff between the timestamps in the data I set and
the ones from tcpdump, but only when the packets are outgoing.
For incoming packets it seems the tcpdump timestamp and the timestamp of
packet from libipq seem the same (ofcourse there can be some microsecond
differences). Why is it happening this way, and is there a possiblity of
making tcpdump to save the data only after libipq has taken care of them?
Regards,
Oumer
next reply other threads:[~2003-10-10 7:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-10 7:20 Oumer Teyeb [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-10-10 9:22 Tcpdump and libipq pigi
2003-10-10 7:52 Pierluigi Frullani
2003-10-10 7:32 Oumer Teyeb
2003-10-08 9:14 Oumer Teyeb
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3F865DA4.8020104@cpk.auc.dk \
--to=oumer@cpk.auc.dk \
--cc=netfilter@lists.netfilter.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.