-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 106
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Very chatty doesn't seem to adhere to beat? #96
Comments
Hi, |
Thanks.
|
I also had a problem that I configured both ends of the tunnel with paths. It really does not like that. Just configuring one end solved the packet rate problem. I still implemented a few fixes in terms of scaling the beat, kxtimeout, keepalive. |
./glorytun version
0.3.4-51-g32267e8 libsodium 10.3
172.31.92.108:
./glorytun bind dev tun0 keyfile gt.key &
./glorytun path dev tun0 addr 172.38.10.243 to addr 172.31.92.108 set up losslimit 2% beat 1000ms rate auto
ifconfig tun0 10.0.1.2 pointopoint 10.0.1.1 up
172.38.10.243
./glorytun bind dev tun0 keyfile gt.key &
./glorytun path dev tun0 addr 172.31.92.108 to addr 172.38.10.243 set up losslimit 2% beat 1000ms rate auto
ifconfig tun0 10.0.1.1 pointopoint 10.0.1.2 up
the machines are completely idle with no traffic going through the tunnel
as soon as tunnel is established the MTU discovery and BEATS start going over 100 packets a second even though I set beat to 1000ms.
tcpdump -p udp
tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode
listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 262144 bytes
16:33:03.001225 IP ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 1472
16:33:03.001247 IP ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 1472
16:33:03.001294 IP ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 1472
16:33:03.001317 IP ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 1472
16:33:03.045330 IP ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 147
16:33:03.045377 IP ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 147
16:33:03.045399 IP ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 147
16:33:03.045420 IP ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 147
16:33:03.092218 IP ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 147
16:33:03.092218 IP ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 147
16:33:03.092284 IP ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 147
16:33:03.092304 IP ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 147
16:33:03.138599 IP ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 1472
16:33:03.138627 IP ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 1472
16:33:03.138681 IP ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 1472
16:33:03.138706 IP ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 1472
16:33:03.183990 IP ip-172-31-92-108.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000 > ip-172-38-10-243.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal.5000: UDP, length 147
any ideas why? Is it due to the losslimit so it is probing frequently for that?
Thanks
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: