Snort mailing list archives
Re: Portscan2 woes
From: Erek Adams <erek () snort org>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 18:12:40 -0400 (EDT)
On Fri, 2 May 2003, Matt Kettler wrote: [...snip...]
Disabling it fixed the packet drop rate problem, and also made snort use significantly less memory. I guess it's just not cut out for lower-end hardware.
Just a FYI (which I'm sure Matt knows! ;-): Snort 2.0 takes up _quite_ a bit more memory than 1.9.x. If you're running on memory starved hardware (64 or less MB) then you'll have issues trying to run Snort. If you are on a setup like that, then try: config detection: search-method lowmem It should cut your mem usage back to the 1.9.x days. Cheers! ----- Erek Adams "When things get weird, the weird turn pro." H.S. Thompson ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Snort-users mailing list Snort-users () lists sourceforge net Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-users Snort-users list archive: http://www.geocrawler.com/redir-sf.php3?list=snort-users
Current thread:
- Portscan2 woes Robin Brown (May 02)
- Re: Portscan2 woes Matt Kettler (May 02)
- Re: Portscan2 woes Erek Adams (May 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- FW: Portscan2 woes Gavin Lowe (May 02)
- FW: Portscan2 woes Robin Brown (May 02)
- Re: Portscan2 woes Matt Kettler (May 02)