nanog mailing list archives

Re: Alternative to NetFlow for Measuring Traffic flows


From: Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 01:19:18 -0500


On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 11:41:12PM -0500, alex () yuriev com wrote:

Also, that method has the same "knowing the routes" problem as netflow. 
Whereever you are getting your list of ASN's route ASN.*"'s routes, there 
is pretty much no way they are accurate (for an ASN of ANY size).

The vast majority of the routes will be an intersection of routes
announced by the AS to other AS (including looking glasses).

Assume you are provider A, and you are considering peering with provider
B. Assume Provider B has customer Z, who buys transit from Provider B and
Provider C. Assume you already peer with provider C.

You have no way to know if customer Z will be part of your routes to 
Provider B, or if you will prefer them over provider C, without having the 
route list.

This is a very common situation if you have any decent amount of peering,
and/or if you are considering peering with a provider who has any
reasonable number of multihomed customers. As we've already proved in
previous nanog emails, the top 20 route-announcing providers added
together have enough routes to cover the internet around 8 times over. 
Even looking glasses may not contain all the paths available.

Projecting actual IP traffic onto actual IP routes is the only way to do 
it.

-- 
Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net>       http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)


Current thread: