nanog mailing list archives
Re: Real world sflow vs netflow?
From: Simon Leinen <simon.leinen () switch ch>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:32:45 +0200
James Braunegg writes:
In the end I did real life testing comparing each platform
Great, thanks for sharing your results! (It would be nice if you could tell us a little bit about the configuration, i.e. what kind of sampling you used.) [...]
That being said both netflow and sflow both under read by about 3% when compared to snmp port counters, which we put to the conclusion was broadcast traffic etc which the routers didn't see / flow.
That's one reason, but another reason would be that at least in Netflow (but sFlow may be similar depending on how you use it), the reported byte counts only include the sizes of the "L3" packets, i.e. starting at the IP header, while the SNMP interface counters (ifInOctets etc.) include L2 overhead such as Ethernet frame headers and such. -- Simon.
Current thread:
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow?, (continued)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Peter Phaal (Jul 13)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Joe Loiacono (Jul 13)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Łukasz Bromirski (Jul 14)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Mikael Abrahamsson (Jul 14)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Łukasz Bromirski (Jul 14)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Paolo Lucente (Jul 15)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Nick Hilliard (Jul 15)
- RE: Real world sflow vs netflow? James Braunegg (Jul 16)
- RE: Real world sflow vs netflow? David Hubbard (Jul 16)
- RE: Real world sflow vs netflow? James Braunegg (Jul 16)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Simon Leinen (Jul 17)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Nick Hilliard (Jul 17)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Peter Phaal (Jul 17)
- Re: Real world sflow vs netflow? Peter Phaal (Jul 13)