On the contrary - SPAN nee port mirroring cuts into the
frames-per-second budget of linecards, as the traffic is in essence
being duplicated. It is not 'free', and it has a profound impact on
the the switch's data-plane traffic forwarding capacity.
Unlike NetFlow.
In hosting case
Cisco ASRs and MXs with inline jflow can do hundreds of K flows/second
without affecting packet forwarding.
Yes, i agree,those are good for netflow, but when they already exist in
network.
Does it worth to buy ASR, if L3 switch already doing the job
(BGP/ACL/rate-limit/routing)?
Not
On 2014-11-22 18:00, freed...@freedman.net wrote:
Cisco ASRs and MXs with inline jflow can do hundreds of K flows/second
without affecting packet forwarding.
Yes, i agree,those are good for netflow, but when they already exist
in
network.
Does it worth to buy ASR, if L3 switch already
On 11/22/2014 11:18 AM, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
On 2014-11-22 18:00, freed...@freedman.net wrote:
We see a lot of Brocade for switching in hosting providers, which makes
sFlow easy, of course.
Oh, Brocade, recent experience with ServerIron taught me new lesson,
that i can't
do bonding on
On 11/21/14 11:42 AM, Justin Wilson wrote:
But I am buying 1 Gig on a 1 Gig circuit. I could see if it were
burstable but it was being billed as 1Gig on a Gig circuit.
If you're buying 1Gig commit then you're buying 1gig commit.
That's not the contract you described.
Justin
--
Justin
5 matches
Mail list logo
