Re: High accuracy bandwidth accounting?

[Andrew Beverley <andy@andybev.com>]

On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 00:33 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Saturday 2011-05-14 18:29, Andrew Beverley wrote:
> 
> >On Sat, 2011-05-14 at 14:36 +0100, Ed W wrote:
> >
> >Okay, I've played around with this myself using a similar scenario. It
> >looks to me like the packets *are* making it into the conntrack system.
> >
> >I tried setting a LOG target to match those packets with a ctstate of
> >RELATED:
> >
> >iptables -A INPUT -p ICMP -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED -j LOG
> >
> >And they were indeed logged. But there was no visibility of them using
> >the conntrack userspace program.
> 
> Does `conntrack -L` show anything for you at all? 

Yes, it shows the outgoing packets:

udp      17 23 src=10.0.10.206 dst=212.110.185.119 sport=35259 dport=53
packets=3 bytes=168 [UNREPLIED] src=212.110.185.119 dst=10.0.10.206
sport=53 dport=35259 packets=0 bytes=0 mark=0 secmark=0 use=2

But it doesn't show the "ICMP port unreachable" packets that are sent in
reply. The question is: should it show them?

> There is/was a 
> short intermediate time when it would not return anything.

Do you mean there was a time when a particular version of conntrack
would not return anything?

Andy