Network Performance Monitoring: Port Mirroring vs. Network TAPs vs. Hardware Timestamp
Monitoring network traffic was initially used only for highlighting the typology of network traffic and the quantity of packages/bites broadcasted. This information are important to analyze anomalies, to optimize flows (balance network traffic) and to size the infrastructure.
Usually, the NetFlow protocol is used to collect network traffic data. NetFlow can be generated from the network device itself – if the device has this functionality – or from an ad-hoc device such as the nBox. The latter is recommended as it prevents a burgeoning workload of the device. Moreover, the nBox does not sample the data neither does it aggregate data every 5 minutes, as it usually happens when using network devices. When using an nBox, port mirror is used to duplicate traffic data and to send it to the probe.
Port Mirroring
For a quantitative analysis of network traffic data port mirroring is enough, since the most important thing is that the packages are sent to the probe by a fair time.
However, new network performance monitoring systems (APM, NPM) brought tighter requirements than port span and port mirror can provide. Switches need time to copy the packages and send them to the probe. The processing time of that ends up in inaccurate data. This is a real problem if you have to evaluate network latencies of modern networks (microseconds). On top of that, some network devices do not send the packages immediately to the probe: the devices queue the packages until a certain number is reached, before sending them all together to the probe. As a consequence, the temporal distance among the packages isn’t considered and the probe’s results are wrapped.
In this case it is important to consider that the packet ingress time and the packet mirror egress time are different.
We can propose two solutions for fixing it: network Tap and hardware timestamp.
1: Network TAPs
Network TAPs are devices that mirror the traffic and immediately send it to the probe.
Network TAPs are trustworthy as they guarantee zero package loss during the mirroring (this loss might happen if you port mirror has an incorrect setup), they don’t buffer and they reduce the switches’ workload. You can find different kinds on the market, for ethernet and fiber connection, and they are a cheap alternative.
2: Hardware Timestamps
There exist also switches which apply a timestamp on the packages before queuing them up the buffering in the port mirror. The nBox is able to detect and use this (arrival) timestamp. This process eliminates all the time latencies created by the port mirror during the elaboration and the forwarding. These devices are expensive but more flexible as they provide multiple-port mirrors and allow hot configuration.
As a conclusion, port mirrors are great for IDS (intrusion detection System) and for quantitative traffic analysis and network TAPs are great for more precise network performance monitoring.
Hi everyone, I’m Luca, graduated in electrical engineering from the University of Bologna. I am employed by Würth Phoenix since its foundation. I worked mainly as enterprise architect and quality assurance engineer. Previously I was involved in systems measurement and embedded systems programming. I have gained experience on Unix (Solaris, HPUX), Windows, and C, C + +, Java. I personally contribute to the Open Source community as beta tester and developer. During my spare time I love piloting airplanes fly over the beautiful Alps. I practice many sports: tennis, broomball, skiing, alpine skiing, volleyball, soccer, mountain biking, middle distance, none have a sample but the competition excites me! I love hiking, tracking and traveling.
Author
Luca Di Stefano
Hi everyone, I’m Luca, graduated in electrical engineering from the University of Bologna. I am employed by Würth Phoenix since its foundation. I worked mainly as enterprise architect and quality assurance engineer. Previously I was involved in systems measurement and embedded systems programming. I have gained experience on Unix (Solaris, HPUX), Windows, and C, C + +, Java. I personally contribute to the Open Source community as beta tester and developer. During my spare time I love piloting airplanes fly over the beautiful Alps. I practice many sports: tennis, broomball, skiing, alpine skiing, volleyball, soccer, mountain biking, middle distance, none have a sample but the competition excites me! I love hiking, tracking and traveling.
Every now and then I like to keep you up to date about news in the ntop environment. This time it's not news about analysis methods or software, but about a new hardware solution. If you're someone looking for a Read More
In the last few weeks I installed and configured some nBoxes with the new ntopng version 5.2. Now I'd like to briefly tell you all about it. For all of you who don't know what an nBox is, I'll relay Read More
A customer asked me to analyze their network flows, with a solution oriented towards using an nBox that collects NetFlow data from a router located away from the branch office, takes it in for analysis, and then sends it to Read More
Who is using your network and how? What kind of traffic does your company generate? Where does slow network performance come from? ntop has the answers. ntop is a network traffic probe that monitors network usage. This solution provides an intuitive, Read More
Chi riesce a sapere veramente quali sono i protocolli utilizzati nella rete locale? Solitamente con i netflow si può distinguere il traffico attraverso le porte L4 (80=http,443=https,..) ma non è più sufficiente. Alcune applicazioni usano invece porte dinamiche (vedi nfs, Read More