[LibreQoS] Tracking unknown IPs (maybe for 1.4?)

[Robert Chacón]

In our particular case we use RADIUS tied to UISP so we don't have the
immediate need, but I think it's an important feature to add.

Perhaps cpumap-pping can have a feature to define "shaped subnets" during
the filter setup, and then we could query cpumap-pping for a JSON output of
IPs detected in traffic that are in the "shaped subnets" groups, but not
defined in the hash map.

Curious to hear what others think here. Would others need this in order to
adopt LibreQoS?


On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 7:33 AM Herbert Wolverson via LibreQoS <
libreqos at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> As we approach the v1.3 pre-release feature freeze, I've been thinking a
> little bit about nice things to have. One thing I found useful in both
> BracketQoS and Preseem was the ability to grab a list of IP addresses that
> had been through the shaper, but weren't mapped to a queue (obviously, only
> from within the "allowed IP" range - we're not trying to map the Internet!).
>
> In Preseem, there's a link to download a CSV file containing all the
> unmapped IP addresses and how much traffic they have consumed. BracketQoS
> (pre cpumap-pping) has a report showing the IPs (no traffic).
>
> *Why is this useful?*
>
> Knowing which local IP addresses were processed but not mapped lets you
> find:
>
> * the times that a device was installed, but the on-boarding process
> wasn't completed. Yes, that shouldn't happen. And - unfortunately - it
> occasionally does. If you're using RADIUS-based authentication, it's really
> difficult for this to happen - but not everyone is.
> * If there's a bug in your shaper integration, it's helpful to see "oops,
> I put X on the default"
> * Just occasionally, you get a customer who needs a special setup; it's
> helpful to see that it worked.
>
> *Current Status*
>
> Before cpumap-pping, Bracket was grabbing them by reading the pping output
> and listing addresses that didn't match a shaping rule. That doesn't work
> now:
>
> * xdp_pping is spitting out TC handles, rather than IP addresses.
> * With a default rule in place, and handling for IPv6 and IPv4 subnets, an
> IP address might not exactly match an entry (requires an LPM trie lookup) -
> and IPs matching a default rule (::/0 or 0.0.0.0/0) will always come back
> with the "default" handle.
>
> It's currently pretty tricky to do.
>
> So I'm curious; would others like to see this? I have a few ideas for how
> to make it work, but don't want to start serious planning/design if I'm the
> only one who wants the feature.
> _______________________________________________
> LibreQoS mailing list
> LibreQoS at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos
>


-- 
Robert Chacón
CEO | JackRabbit Wireless LLC <http://jackrabbitwireless.com>
Dev | LibreQoS.io
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/libreqos/attachments/20221105/c2f2a109/attachment.html>