--- Simon Garner <sgarner@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wednesday, October 22, 2003 7:11 AM [GMT+1200=NZT], > SBlaze <dagent.geo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Wouldn't ntop be considered a "probing" tool? > > > > I wouldn't consider it a probing tool... something like nmap would be > probing, ntop just listens. And although it puts your eth into > promiscuous mode, I wouldn't call it a packet sniffer since it won't > tell you the contents of any packets, only where they're going and how > big they are etc. I don't think you have anything to worry about. > > Now I have no experience with cable or cable modems (they're practically > non-existent over here) but wouldn't running this on your linux box only > show you whatever data your cable modem is sending to you anyway... > you'd need to put the *cable modem* into promiscuous mode (or > equivalent) to actually receive any data you shouldn't. > > > > > And getting back to my original reason and question for this post. How > > statistically can you see just how much iptables/netfilter is using > > of system resources? > > > > I think we're agreed that the level of data you're seeing wouldn't cause > any problems CPU-wise. You can see kernel CPU usage as "system CPU%" in > top and vmstat and they're saying 0, which would be expected. > > -Simon > > Ok guys well I think that just about wraps this thread up. Special thanks go out to Jeffery, Simon, and Daniel for all thier help. Really THANKS ALOT GUYS!!! ===== In the absence of order there will be chaos. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
