On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
- netflow: seriously, this is not an appropriate sort of port of exporting netflow. this is a "your RP is toast" recovery mechanism, at which point netflow is probably long gone.
it's possible that roland was saying that the oob network should collect flow records and export them to 'something' so you'd have an idea about what traffic was on the network... I can see some value in that. I don't think roland was really saying that normal netflow from a device in production pushing a few hundred gbps of traffic would be appropriate to ship out the OOB network... or I hope that wasn't his point. I don't think oob networks need to be sized for that. I do think that having a reliable OOB Ethernet would be nice, having it not be part of the forwarding plane (and not reachable from the forwarding plane) of the device in the field would also be nice. iLO/DRAC are good analogies...
- rs232: please no. it's 2013. I don't want or need a protocol which was designed for access speeds appropriate to the 1980s.
I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in some places at a reasonable cost, so having serial-console I think is still a requirement. -chris