I think the key here is that Roland isn't often constrained by these financial considerations. I would respectfully disagree with Roland here and agree with Job, Niels, etc. A few networks have robust out of band networks, but most I've seen have an interesting mixture of things and inband is usually the best method. Those that do have "seperate" networks may actually be CoC services from another deparment in the same company riding the same P/PE devices (sometimes routers). I've seen oob networks on DSL, datacenter wifi or cable swaps through the fence to an adjacent rack. An oob network need not be high bandwidth enough to do netflow sampling, this is well regarded as a waste of money by many as the costs for these can often be orders of magnitude more compared to a pure-IP or internet service. I'll say this ranks up there with people who think MPLS VPN == Encryption. It's not unless you think a few byte label is going to confuse people. - Jared On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:32:04PM -0400, Shane Ronan wrote:
So in your world, the money always exists for a separate flow telemetry network?
On 9/1/15 1:29 PM, Roland Dobbins wrote:
On 2 Sep 2015, at 0:18, Niels Bakker wrote:
You're just wrong here.
Sorry, I'm not. I've seen what happens when flow telemetry is 'squeezed out' by pipe-filling DDoS attacks, interrupted by fat-fingers, etc.
It'll happen to you, one day. And then you'll understand.
----------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net>
-- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.