From: Andrew Beverley <andy@andybev.com>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: Ed W <lists@wildgooses.com>, Netfilter <netfilter@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: High accuracy bandwidth accounting?
Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 22:22:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1306099338.2741.317.camel@andybev-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1105160911240.4397@frira.zrqbmnf.qr>
Sorry, a bit late replying...
On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 09:23 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Monday 2011-05-16 08:43, Andrew Beverley wrote:
> >> >
> >> >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?
> >
> >Sorry, when I say it doesn't show them, I mean they are not counted.
>
> They are:
>
> >The ones in this case are coming in as RELATED.
> >>
> >> Monitor with conntrack -E for details.
> >>
> >conntrack -E -d 212.110.185.119 gives:
> >
> > [NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.10.206 dst=212.110.185.119 sport=35676 dport=53 [UNREPLIED] src=212.110.185.119 dst=10.0.10.206 sport=53 dport=35676
>
> Since it is a new/related CT (with sport=35676), the packets won't be counted
> towards the original ct (sport=35259).
I didn't make myself clear. The 2 different connections (and 2 different
source ports) were 2 separate tests, but exhibiting the same results.
>
> >[DESTROY] udp 17 src=10.0.10.206 dst=212.110.185.119 sport=35676 dport=53 [UNREPLIED] src=212.110.185.119 dst=10.0.10.206 sport=53 dport=35676
>
> I observe that only UNREPLIED ones carry no counters - and that such is a
> minority of CT events - probably hinting to nonresponsive servers.
>
The server responds, but with "ICMP port unreachable".
> >But conntrack -E -s 212.110.185.119 gives nothing
>
> No connection was initiated (=packet first seen) from 212.110.185.119.
Correct, but an "ICMP port unreachable" was sent from 212.110.185.119.
To repeat the test:
iptables -A INPUT -p ICMP -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED -j LOG
dig google.com @212.110.185.119
Logged in the system logger:
[354578.512848] IN=wlan0 OUT= MAC=... SRC=212.110.185.119
DST=10.0.10.206 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=54 ID=36992 PROTO=ICMP
TYPE=3 CODE=3 [SRC=10.0.10.206 DST=212.110.185.119 LEN=56 TOS=0x00
PREC=0x00 TTL=53 ID=17592 PROTO=UDP SPT=53163 DPT=53 LEN=36 ]
The only thing shown in conntrack -E is:
[NEW] udp 17 30 src=10.0.10.206 dst=212.110.185.119 sport=53163
dport=53 [UNREPLIED] src=212.110.185.119 dst=10.0.10.206 sport=53
dport=53163
And conntrack -L | grep 212.110.185.119 shows (in completion):
udp 17 22 src=10.0.10.206 dst=212.110.185.119 sport=53163 dport=53
packets=3 bytes=168 [UNREPLIED] src=212.110.185.119 dst=10.0.10.206
sport=53 dport=53163 packets=0 bytes=0 mark=0 use=1
So, the ICMP packets arrive as RELATED, but are not accounted for
looking at the conntrack accounting.
Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-22 21:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-09 14:12 High accuracy bandwidth accounting? Ed W
2011-05-09 21:45 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-05-09 22:07 ` Ed W
2011-05-09 22:16 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-05-09 22:49 ` Ed W
2011-05-11 14:30 ` Ed W
2011-05-12 0:01 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-05-12 22:17 ` Ed W
2011-05-12 22:27 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-05-09 23:23 ` Ed W
2011-05-14 9:23 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-05-14 13:36 ` Ed W
2011-05-14 16:29 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-05-14 22:33 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-05-15 7:23 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-05-15 9:08 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-05-16 6:43 ` Andrew Beverley
2011-05-16 7:23 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-05-22 21:22 ` Andrew Beverley [this message]
2011-05-16 14:35 ` Ed W
2011-05-16 14:59 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-05-16 16:53 ` Ed W
2011-05-14 9:48 ` Marek Kierdelewicz
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=1306099338.2741.317.camel@andybev-desktop \
--to=andy@andybev.com \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=lists@wildgooses.com \
--cc=netfilter@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).