ICMP records of an unusual size
Michael Sanderson
sanders at cs.ubc.ca
Tue Apr 1 17:04:32 EDT 2014
Carter, 3.0.7.3 has been good overnight, so a thumbs up there.
Jesse, my initial build was for a BSD box, and I did not get the error. I built for Linux today and do get it. 9 month old messages to the list (July 8, 2013) indicate that this is for Solaris and Carter's workaround was to comment out the 3 lines in argus/ArgusSource.h. Apparently that fix never got into the version on the ftp server.
Michael Sanderson
On Apr 1, 2014, at 12:42 PM, Jesse Bowling <jessebowling at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I got the following when trying to compile argus-3.0.7.3:
>
> gcc -O3 -I. -I/usr/local/include -I./../include -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -c ArgusSource.c
> In file included from ./ArgusModeler.h:330,
> from ./argus.h:40,
> from ArgusSource.c:67:
> ./ArgusSource.h:893: error: ‘ArgusIpNetPacket’ undeclared here (not in a function)
> make: *** [ArgusSource.o] Error 1
>
> Following this I found:
>
> #ifdef DLT_IPNET
> { ArgusIpNetPacket, DLT_IPNET, "ArgusIpNetPacket()" },
> #endif
>
> Since this seem to be geared towards Mavericks and not my platform I took a chance and commented this out:
>
> /*
> #ifdef DLT_IPNET
> { ArgusIpNetPacket, DLT_IPNET, "ArgusIpNetPacket()" },
> #endif
> */
>
> Which seems to have resolved my issue...Is this expected? Michael, did you encounter this error?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jesse
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Carter Bullard <carter at qosient.com> wrote:
> Hey Michael,
> Thanks !!! That sure does make it a lot easier !!!
> If you don't mind sending a thumbs up or down, say tomorrow, that would be huge. If up, I'll move the latest link to argus-3.0.7.3, probably can do that now.... and then warn the Mavericks users that a fix is on the way.
>
> Carter
>
> > On Mar 31, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Michael Sanderson <sanders at cs.ubc.ca> wrote:
> >
> > I've been running argus 3.0.7.3 on my capture system for about 3 hours without seeing any of the bogus pkts/bytes counts, which were appearing within an hour previously.
> >
> > Michael Sanderson
> >
> >> On Mar 31, 2014, at 7:12 AM, Michael Sanderson <sanders at cs.ubc.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> In my case, clients up to and including 3.0.7.18 can get through. 3.0.7.19 and onward have problems reading the bad data. I'll get back to you about argus 3.0.7.3. I was running 3.0.5.10 prior to this.
> >>
> >> Michael Sanderson
> >>
> >>> On Mar 31, 2014, at 5:13 AM, Carter Bullard <carter at qosient.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> OK, so with new argus-3.0.7.5 and most argus-clients, we've got bogus values poping up for pkts/bytes. argus-clients-3.0.7.23 has problems reading the bad data, but previous clients can at least get through.
> >>>
> >>> Downgrading to 3.0.7.3 fixes the problem for those that have seen it ???
> >>>
> >>> I'm traveling this week, but will be working this to fix. I need to try to reproduce the problem, so if anyone has a packet capture that generates, that would help !!!
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for the inconvenience !!!
> >>>
> >>> Carter
> >>>
> >>>> On Mar 31, 2014, at 2:59 AM, Michael Sanderson <sanders at cs.ubc.ca> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Looking at my data more closely, I'm seeing these unexpectedly large pkts/bytes on TCP connections as well, not just ICMP. Haven't seen them from UDP, but ....
> >>>>
> >>>> Michael Sanderson
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 30, 2014, at 11:42 PM, Michael Sanderson <sanders at cs.ubc.ca> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jesse/Carter, I also see something similar after an update to argus 3.0.7.5 last week. It is being collected via a radium from clients 3.0.7.6. ra from 3.0.7.6 and from 3.0.7.18 reads the file, displaying the apparently bogus pkts/bytes. The ra from 3.0.7.19 through 3.0.7.23 displays everything up to the record with the bogus pkts/bytes. Perhaps this is the issue Scott McIntyre raised about argus-clients stopping, as he also had a 3.0.7.5 argus running.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have put a 110K anonymized file called data.anon in ftp.qosient.com:/incoming .
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Michael Sanderson
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mar 30, 2014, at 10:06 AM, Carter Bullard <carter at qosient.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Well, these are weird. Any chance I can get a file with these records in them ??
> >>>>>> So, any sense as to how these are generated, are they coming right off of argus ??
> >>>>>> Carter
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mar 29, 2014, at 8:44 PM, Jesse Bowling <jessebowling at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I have some flows with duration zero, but they don't seem to match up with the R.U.S:
> >>>>>>> StartTime Proto Sport Dir Dport TotPkts TotBytes Dur
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:09:49.460105 1 0x0303 <-> 0x62ea 2 61 0.069073
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:09:49.473637 1 0x0303 <- 0x60ea 2182690890685501 2495973268128260 0.028096
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:11:26.413780 1 0x0303 <- 0x68ea 1910394259086494 1915658761929220 0.032138
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:11:26.427968 1 0x0303 <- 0x6aea 2019091291413663 612496964846084 0.006739
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:11:52.824234 1 0x0303 -> 0x72ea 1 70 0.000000
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:11:52.832111 1 0x0303 -> 0x70ea 1 70 0.000000
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:12:46.868043 1 0x0303 -> 0x78ea 1280 34305 0.010306
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:12:46.878386 1 0x0303 <- 0x76ea 3837314156567791 167070201545220 0.011786
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:13:02.693644 1 0x0303 -> 0x62ea 1 70 0.000000
> >>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:13:02.693721 1 0x0303 -> 0x64ea 1 70 0.000000
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Jesse
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Carter Bullard <carter at qosient.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hey Jesse,
> >>>>>>> What was the duration of these flows ?? If zero, we had a bug a while back where splitting records used an uninitialed chunk of memory.
> >>>>>>> If the duration is zero (only one packet) I'm thinking this maybe the result of that bug ??
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Carter
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Mar 29, 2014, at 1:12 PM, Jesse Bowling <jessebowling at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I noticed a few odd records in our argus data the other day, and I'm a bit stumped as to how they might have gotten there...I see these:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> StartTime LastTime Proto Sport Dir Dport TotPkts TotBytes
> >>>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:09:49.473637 03/25/14 11:09:49.501733 1 0x0303 <- 0x60ea 2182690890685501 2495973268128260
> >>>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:11:26.413780 03/25/14 11:11:26.445918 1 0x0303 <- 0x68ea 1910394259086494 1915658761929220
> >>>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:11:26.427968 03/25/14 11:11:26.434707 1 0x0303 <- 0x6aea 2019091291413663 612496964846084
> >>>>>>>> 03/25/14 11:12:46.878386 03/25/14 11:12:46.890172 1 0x0303 <- 0x76ea 3837314156567791 167070201545220
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> These records all had the same source and destination address. Does anyone have a theory? My guess is either corruption of the data (seems unlikely in this case) or perhaps something had issue parsing these particular records (racluster, rasplit)?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Any suggestions from the list on how I might figure out more about these records or how they might have been generated?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Jesse
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Jesse Bowling
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Jesse Bowling
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jesse Bowling
>
More information about the argus
mailing list