Which printer are you using? I see timestamps using both gprint and syslog on my system. The output snippet I sent was a syslog message. And did the procfs parameters show up post kernel upgrade? On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 1:00 AM, Muhammad Faisal <faisalusuf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The kernel upgraded to 3.10, timestamp was required a newer kernel. > But still no timestamps in the logs: > > Mar 16 13:58:11 wc01 ulogd[4022]: [NEW] ORIG: SRC=172.16.50.17 > DST=192.168.1.1 PROTO=TCP SPT=17012 DPT=5222 PKTS=0 BYTES=0 , REPLY: > SRC=192.168.1.1 DST=192.168.2.1 PROTO=TCP SPT=5222 DPT=17012 PKTS=0 > BYTES=0 > Best Regards, > Muhammad Faisal > > Disclaimer: > Information in this e-mail and attachments is confidential and may be > legally privileged. Only intended recipients are authorized to use it. > If you have received this message in error, please delete it and all > copies of the message from your system and notify the sender > immediately by return e-mail. I'm neither liable for incomplete > transmission of the information in this communication nor for damage > caused by any virus transmitted through this e-mail. > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:28 PM, Muhammad Faisal <faisalusuf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Yes, >> >> [root@wc01 ~]# modprobe nf_conntrack_netlink >> [root@wc01 ~]# modprobe nf_conntrack_ipv4 >> [root@wc01 ~]# echo "1"> /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_timestamp >> -bash: /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_timestamp: No such file or directory >> [root@wc01 ~]# >> >> CentOS 6.8 >> [root@wc01 ~]# uname -a >> Linux wc01 2.6.32-642.15.1.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Feb 24 14:31:22 UTC >> 2017 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux >> Best Regards, >> Muhammad Faisal >> >> Disclaimer: >> Information in this e-mail and attachments is confidential and may be >> legally privileged. Only intended recipients are authorized to use it. >> If you have received this message in error, please delete it and all >> copies of the message from your system and notify the sender >> immediately by return e-mail. I'm neither liable for incomplete >> transmission of the information in this communication nor for damage >> caused by any virus transmitted through this e-mail. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:21 PM, V Kurien <kurien.varugis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hmm. Odd. What OS are you on? I am on U16.04. How important are the >>> timestamps to you? Note that the log collector can add timestamps as >>> well. >>> >>> Did you modprobe appropriately? >>> modprobe nf_conntrack_netlink >>> modprobe nf_conntrack_ipv4 >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Muhammad Faisal <faisalusuf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Hi Kurien, >>>> Please see the nf_conntrack_timestamp giving error is it the correct command? >>>> >>>> [root@wc01 ~]# /bin/echo "1"> /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_timestamp >>>> -bash: /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_timestamp: No such file or directory >>>> [root@wc01 ~]# cat /proc/sys >>>> sys/ sysrq-trigger sysvipc/ >>>> [root@wc01 ~]# cat /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_ >>>> nf_conntrack_acct >>>> nf_conntrack_buckets >>>> nf_conntrack_checksum >>>> nf_conntrack_count >>>> nf_conntrack_events >>>> nf_conntrack_events_retry_timeout >>>> nf_conntrack_expect_max >>>> nf_conntrack_generic_timeout >>>> nf_conntrack_icmp_timeout >>>> nf_conntrack_log_invalid >>>> nf_conntrack_max >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_be_liberal >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_loose >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_max_retrans >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_close >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_close_wait >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_established >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_fin_wait >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_last_ack >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_max_retrans >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_syn_recv >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_syn_sent >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_time_wait >>>> nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_unacknowledged >>>> nf_conntrack_udp_timeout >>>> nf_conntrack_udp_timeout_stream >>>> nf_log/ >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Muhammad Faisal >>>> >>>> Disclaimer: >>>> Information in this e-mail and attachments is confidential and may be >>>> legally privileged. Only intended recipients are authorized to use it. >>>> If you have received this message in error, please delete it and all >>>> copies of the message from your system and notify the sender >>>> immediately by return e-mail. I'm neither liable for incomplete >>>> transmission of the information in this communication nor for damage >>>> caused by any virus transmitted through this e-mail. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:04 AM, V Kurien <kurien.varugis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> Don't you have to enable timestamp and byte logging support? >>>>> /bin/echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_acct >>>>> /bin/echo "1"> /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_timestamp >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Muhammad Faisal <faisalusuf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> Hello, >>>>>> I would like to understand is this a feature or a possible bug that >>>>>> Year info is missing from the ulogd2 output. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Mar 11 15:55:59 wc01 ulogd[14289]: [NEW] ORIG: SRC=5.55.22.172 >>>>>> DST=192.168.1.3 PROTO=TCP SPT=2083 DPT=5158 PKTS=0 BYTES=0 , REPLY: >>>>>> SRC=192.168.1.3 DST=5.55.22.172 PROTO=TCP SPT=5158 DPT=2083 PKTS=0 >>>>>> BYTES=0 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>> Muhammad Faisal >>>>>> -- >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in >>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
