On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Stefan Fouant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For all intents and purposes there are no practical differences > between the two methods you have proposed, since your firewall filter > term is essentially a match all... The main difference is when you > want to sample a subset of the traffic traversing a given interface. > This is when matching on particular flows using a firewall filter > comes in handy. If you have a particularly large amount of traffic > traversing your interfaces and you don't have a requirement to sample > all traffic, sampling via the use of firewall filters will also allow > you to have more fine-grained control over your AS-PIC/MS-PIC/etc. > resources. Thanks Steve for answering my question. I have been a little frustrated finding solid documentation on Juniper's web site about their netflow implementation. I prefer to sample everything but set a sampling rate of say 1:50. The only place I was able to find interesting aspects of the sampling rate was in someone's presentation I found through searching google. This presentation stated the software based sampling was limited to 8000 pps and to adjust your sampling rate with this limitation in mind and the interface utilization. Is there some secret grail for finding good documention on Juniper's site besides the CLI commands with regards to netflow? :-) /b _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
