[187918] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: sFlow vs netFlow/IPFIX
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Sun Feb 28 21:42:04 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: "Roland Dobbins" <rdobbins@arbor.net>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
In-Reply-To: <FFBBB0C1-7002-4B0C-84B6-429D81EFCB71@arbor.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 21:41:54 -0500
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1456713714_250257P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 09:24:42 +0700, "Roland Dobbins" said:
> On 29 Feb 2016, at 6:26, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
>
> > Around here they are currently voting on a law that will require unsampled
> > 1:1 netflow on all data in an ISP network with more than 100 users.
>
> That's interesting, given that most larger routers don't support 1:1.
In the war between reality and governmental paranoia, reality usually loses.
--==_Exmh_1456713714_250257P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001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=U3hl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1456713714_250257P--
