<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none;" alt="" src="https://px.ads.linkedin.com/collect/?pid=2975524&amp;fmt=gif">
BLOG

[Video] SPAN vs TAP Comparison

April 14, 2016

I want to address the age old argument of SPAN vs TAP. Over the years I’ve read a few articles covering the points you should be familiar with when working with either. Most of the articles cover similar points; SPAN will not forward corrupted packets and that it can drop packets.

What I haven’t seen is material addressing the timing issue as well as a realistic load of approximately 9%. Here's what my video shows...

Timing, Load Testing and Latency with SPAN vs. TAP Ports

Even if I capture 100% of the packets, I’ve always wondering if the timing is accurate. I wanted to determine if the packet delta time is affected and by how much.

The other item I wanted to cover is one of load. Most articles that I’ve reviewed typically test with 90-100% load on a link. Some analysts tell me that since they do not have that much traffic on their monitored link, this is not an issue. I wanted to set up a test with a realistic load, so I chose approximate 9%.

 

Tony Fortunato's TAP vs. SPAN Comparison

I put together this video reviewing my methodology and results for Network Computing, where I generated traffic using a network analysis tablet and captured the traffic with another, and in some cases a third one. I chose to only generate a 9% load and a 757-byte frame to most closely resemble the average load and frame size you would see on a gigabit port. My logic here is that if these test parameters cause an issue, then a greater load only gets worse. I chose OptiView since it can capture with a 10-nanosecond resolution, and I used packet slicing to reduce the total trace file size.  For my tap, I used a Garland Technology P1GCCAS 1Gb Copper TAP.

I filtered the remaining trace file by the IP identifier since it keeps this value constant for all packets. I then converted the filtered trace file to a CSV file using Wireshark and charted the filtered output’s delta time using Excel.

The order of the tests are quite important for me. The first test was a baseline of two back to back, the second test introduced a switch, the third test used a TAP, and the last test used a SPAN port.

 

 

 

New Call-to-action


Summary of the Packet Latency Results:

  • Back to Back = 68 - 69 microseconds
  • Switch = 56 - 80 microseconds
  • TAP = 55 to 80 microseconds
  • SPAN Port  = 50 - 88 microseconds

The conclusion of our tests highlight that the SPAN port used created more latency between packets as well as per packet latency where the TAP resulted in very little latency.

 

Please read the full article I wrote for Network Computing with deeper analysis.

Getting things to work better - bit by bit-
Tony Fortunato
Sr Network Performance Specialist
The Technology Firm

 

If you want to learn more about Real Network Visualtion Consideration for Professionals, download our free white paper, TAP vs SPAN.

 

See Everything. Secure Everything.

Contact us now to secure and optimized your network operations

Heartbeats Packets Inside the Bypass TAP

If the inline security tool goes off-line, the TAP will bypass the tool and automatically keep the link flowing. The Bypass TAP does this by sending heartbeat packets to the inline security tool. As long as the inline security tool is on-line, the heartbeat packets will be returned to the TAP, and the link traffic will continue to flow through the inline security tool.

If the heartbeat packets are not returned to the TAP (indicating that the inline security tool has gone off-line), the TAP will automatically 'bypass' the inline security tool and keep the link traffic flowing. The TAP also removes the heartbeat packets before sending the network traffic back onto the critical link.

While the TAP is in bypass mode, it continues to send heartbeat packets out to the inline security tool so that once the tool is back on-line, it will begin returning the heartbeat packets back to the TAP indicating that the tool is ready to go back to work. The TAP will then direct the network traffic back through the inline security tool along with the heartbeat packets placing the tool back inline.

Some of you may have noticed a flaw in the logic behind this solution!  You say, “What if the TAP should fail because it is also in-line? Then the link will also fail!” The TAP would now be considered a point of failure. That is a good catch – but in our blog on Bypass vs. Failsafe, I explained that if a TAP were to fail or lose power, it must provide failsafe protection to the link it is attached to. So our network TAP will go into Failsafe mode keeping the link flowing.

Glossary

  1. Single point of failure: a risk to an IT network if one part of the system brings down a larger part of the entire system.

  2. Heartbeat packet: a soft detection technology that monitors the health of inline appliances. Read the heartbeat packet blog here.

  3. Critical link: the connection between two or more network devices or appliances that if the connection fails then the network is disrupted.

NETWORK MANAGEMENT | THE 101 SERIES