Re: [pmacct-discussion] peer-AS calculation problem

[Zenon Mousmoulas]

Hi Paolo,

On 26 Νοε 2009, at 9:09 ΠΜ, Paolo Lucente wrote:

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:51:44AM +0200, Zenon Mousmoulas wrote:

I was under the impression that 'nfacctd_as_new: bgp' would cause
nfacctd to lookup ASNs even though the origin ASN is already  
exported in
netflow datagrams; this is something I was trying to avoid.

Consider the lookup must be done anyway to populate the other BGP
related primitives. So grasping ASNs and next-hop from the BGP RIB
is absolutely negligible operation. IHMO, it's way more savy to
turn the BGP stuff off the NetFlow export at your routers.

Indeed. Thanks.


Some of these are probably 4-byte ASNs obviously exported wrong in
netflow datagrams. When nfacctd_as_new is set to bgp, it doesn't get
these wrong.

So it seems that not "trusting" netflow records for these fields  
may be a
good idea after all. Thanks!

Yes, very true. I'm also curious to see if i got it correctly: your
routers support 4-bytes ASNs (ie. you can set a clean peer-as 123456),
supports NetFlow v9 and still can't encode the former into the latter?

They certainly support 4-byte ASNs (that was the reason for the last  
IOS upgrade) in most aspects, i.e. the BGP router, route-maps etc, but  
they obviously missed the netflow exporter. I can't say I'm surprised.

Btw, don't want to open a v9 vs v5 flame. But: if you consider many
commercial entities are not really interested yet in accounting IPv6
(the interest come with the volumes, right?); and add that BGP can
give easily the 4-bytes ASNs. Well, this makes less traction on v9
for these things expecially if some vendors let you pay extra to get
it ...

You are right. So far the only reason for v9 was exporting BGP next- 
hop. I would wish that IPv6 accounting was supported, but it isn't, on  
this platform.
In that respect, v9 turns out to be just a more expensive way to  
export the same information as v5.

Source peer ASN calculation does not seem to be affected by this
setting, however. Nfacctd still misses it somehow.

Maybe more effective if i give this a brief look to see where the
problem is. I'll contact you privately and we might post a summary
afterwards.

OK

Thanks,
Z.
_______________________________________________
pmacct-discussion mailing list
http://www.pmacct.net/#mailinglists