[56687] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Route Supression Problem
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adam Rothschild)
Wed Mar 12 12:05:49 2003
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 12:03:49 -0500
From: Adam Rothschild <asr@asr.org>
To: Michael.Dillon@radianz.com
Cc: nanog@merit.edu, asr@asr.org
In-Reply-To: <OFA39DA16D.A793E85C-ON80256CE7.004C1044-80256CE7.004D07ED@radianz.com>; from Michael.Dillon@radianz.com on Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 02:01:23PM +0000
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 2003-03-12-09:01:23, Michael.Dillon@radianz.com wrote:
> Still using MRTG? Have you read this?
> http://www.mit.edu/~rbeverly/papers/rtg-lisa02.pdf
> Or this? http://rtg.sourceforge.net/docs/rtgfaq.html
> [...]
> Seriously, how much do you risk losing over one incident like this
> where you don't have the data to show your customer exactly what
> happened and give them the impression that you are an amazing TCP/IP
> guru? MRTG is utterly obsolete; replace it!
Ok, let's call a spade a spade. I've been an "early adopter" of RTG,
and am using it for traffic graphing in a production environment (in
conjunction with a more tested Cricket/RRD setup, for redundancy and
data verification). I think it's a nifty tool, with great potential,
a clueful and responsive maintainer, and a loyal user base continually
developing and contributing cool stuff. However, like any software in
its infancy, RTG is far from perfect.
I find it unfair to label MRTG as "utterly obsolete," nor to speak of
RTG -- or any one tool -- as a drop-in replacement appropriate for all
environments. Sure it doesn't scale particularly well, but there's a
certain appeal to its simplicity and versatility, which I consider a
key to its continued usage in the face of more robust alternatives.
-a
