Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 22:05:13 -0400 From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call for testers: ng_netflow with v9 and IPv6 support Message-ID: <d2e731a10909081905l2ebc6d0dredda67a885df96d0@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4AA6A4C8.4090200@ipfw.ru> References: <d2e731a10909061511q35447425s6cec18460fb48bd1@mail.gmail.com> <4AA6A4C8.4090200@ipfw.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Thanks for pointing out those RFCs. Sure. There are more I probably missed. Search rfc-editor or ietf for netflow or ipfix. > can v5 count ipv6 ? No, what's next netflow version can ? v9? Ok, let's > implement v9. Yep, ipv6 is becoming really important, definitely on backbones. nProbe has had it for a while. nProbe is a bpf flow sniffer and exporter. I don't know about any other open source ones that do, besides your patch :) > However, IPFIX seems to be very much like v9 at a first glance. v9 was the first that came out, mostly a defacto cisco proprietary thing as was v5. Netflow needed to be opened up / standardized. So ipfix group was started. cisco v9 was submitted to ietf ipfix working group as one of proposed ipfix methods. v9 was then modified in the group a bit and called IPFIX. Some of this is in rfc 3955. Ipfix is probably the way to go. Of course others on the lists could input whether they see more of v9 or ipfix now and in future.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d2e731a10909081905l2ebc6d0dredda67a885df96d0>