Hi, Johannes Faerber wrote: > If someone on this list had similar ideas I would be thankful to hear > his experience/advice before we start work. Also I would welcome > comments on the performance of ethereal during capturing (i.e. is > our approach unnecessary because ethereal will definitely not loose > any packets at all?) A hint to this question could be the CPU usage. If you constantly have 100% during capture, I think you have a rather high risk - but if your CPU monitor shows you the "idle-process" as main CPU consumer, nothing should be lost, as long as the media you save the data is fast enough. Another point is the bus bandwidth. If you have a Gigabit Ethernet with high load (which delivers approx. 100 MB raw data per second), and write the capture file to a harddisk (which gives another stream of 100 MB/sec), you need at least 200 MB/sec raw bandwidth. However, with normal PC mainboards, the PCI bus is the bottleneck here (theoretically max. 133 MB/sec). So a soon as your RAM gets filled up, you definitely loose packets. Additionally, usual harddisks can't store data in such a high rate. Of course, this is different if you have a server board with a crossbar cwitch and multiple independant PCI-buses (those often also have 266 or 533 MB/sec/Bus, as they use double bandwidth and / or double clock frequency), and a RAID array which can write 100 MB/sec. I used ethereal to sniff on 10 MBit ethernet for just a while now, using 200Mhz-class PCs, and I didn't experience any high loads, as I didn't realize any missed packets. markus -- Markus Schaber -- http://www.schabi.de/ -- ICQ: 22042130 +-------------------------------------------------------------+ | Allgemeine Sig-Verletzung 0815/4711 <nicht OK> <Erbrechen> | +-------------------------------------------------------------+
Powered by MHonArc 2.6.10