From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: NFLOG - missing packets? Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 13:53:56 +0200 Message-ID: <48282FD4.4070806@netfilter.org> References: <200805101657.45111.anton.vazir@gmail.com> <200805101750.38472.anton.vazir@gmail.com> <20080511161837.GJ11778@ice-age> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Eric Leblond , Anton , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Pablo Neira Ayuso Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:58913 "EHLO us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753127AbYELLqJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 May 2008 07:46:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080511161837.GJ11778@ice-age> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Eric Leblond wrote: > Hello, > > On Saturday, 2008 May 10 at 17:50:37 +0500, Anton wrote: >> Something wrong quite definitelly, >> in 700Mb of the data it logs only 43Mb > > I've done some test on my system and I've got similar results. Sole > difference is the ratio between logged packets and unlogged packets. > > I've downloaded a 48Mo at a rate of 348.28K/s and I have the following > result : > Iptables : 33625 packets, 50383786 bits > Ulogd2 : 33272 packets 49856076 bits > > As usual, size does not matter. The problem is due to some packets not > being loggued. It recall me results of Pablo's conntrackd benchmark. > After a given rate, the netlink subsystem is not able to transmit > messages. > > IMHO, the main issue is that the lost (or the overrun) does not seem to be logged > somewhere. I'm finishing a patchset to improve this and other aspects of ulogd. I'll post them to the ML soon. -- "Los honestos son inadaptados sociales" -- Les Luthiers