[Bro] cluster question

Hovsep Levi hovsep.sanjay.levi at gmail.com
Fri Oct 7 09:23:11 PDT 2016

You sound a little confused, multi-node scaling is a feature of Bro and
really the only way to monitor high volume locations.  See the LBNL paper
on Bro at 100G for an example.  When using a front-end load-balancer you
are distributing the traffic directly to the worker nodes which in turn
produce metadata to be sent to the manager node.

The decision to use more than one box is relative to the processing
requirements, the basic formula is something like one 3.0 Ghz core per
250Mbps of traffic.

If you use multiple managers you break global visibility in the scripting
context, proxies share state among the entire cluster which operates as a
sort of giant shared memory space.  Multiple managers is essentially
independent Bro clusters.  I think a basic example would be a scanning
script or SQL injection script... if the threshold is 25 and
attacks your entire network each cluster only sees 1/n of that activity and
may not fire an event because of the limited context.

As for the bandwidth concerns you mention I'm not sure what you mean
exactly.  The metadata produced by the workers and sent to the manager
(logs) are a fraction of the monitored raw traffic.



On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 12:02 PM, erik clark <philosnef at gmail.com> wrote:

> I noticed the previous gentleman running 160 workers (I assume 16 boxes
> with 10 workers each??) in a cluster, and had a general question about this.
> If I am pumping out well above 5Gb/s, doesn't that mean running in a
> cluser that I am pushing 5 right back out the other side? If so, this
> doesn't seem to scale well beyond 5ish Gb/s.
> At what point, and how many pps, should we move away from a single manager
> host talking to cluster hosts? Even if there is no processing by bro on the
> manager, you still have bandwidth issues, unless you are loading up your
> bro manager with multiple 10 gig nics, and are loadbalancing upstream, in
> which case, why aren't you just load balancing to stand alone boxes each
> with their own manager, logger, and set of workers?
> It seems to me that running multiple physical bro hosts tied to a single
> manager is the poor mans solution to running proper load balancing hardware
> upstream. Am I mistaken?
> _______________________________________________
> Bro mailing list
> bro at bro-ids.org
> http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/bro
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/bro/attachments/20161007/4916b0d3/attachment.html 

More information about the Bro mailing list