Hi, i have an interface with softflowd running, but since this router is going into a redudant setup i will have carp devices. i will have serveral carp devices on one the interfaces where i running softflowd at the moment, because on this interfaces i have more than one ip. does it make sence to run softflowd on the carp devices (serveral softlfowd istances then) or better to run it on the psyical interface like now (fxp0)? memic
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, memic wrote:> Hi, > > i have an interface with softflowd running, but since this router is > going into a redudant setup > i will have carp devices. i will have serveral carp devices on one the > interfaces where i running > softflowd at the moment, because on this interfaces i have more than one ip. > does it make sence to run softflowd on the carp devices (serveral > softlfowd istances then) > or better to run it on the psyical interface like now (fxp0)?I would guess that it would be better to run it on the carp interfaces, but in a switched environment there should not be too much effective difference - the physical interface should not be seeing traffic destined for the virtual arp address of a carp interface when it is in slave mode. On the other hand, running multiple instances of softflowd shouldn''t waste too many cycles. -d
even with about 10 instances running? Damien Miller wrote:> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, memic wrote: > > >> Hi, >> >> i have an interface with softflowd running, but since this router is >> going into a redudant setup >> i will have carp devices. i will have serveral carp devices on one the >> interfaces where i running >> softflowd at the moment, because on this interfaces i have more than one ip. >> does it make sence to run softflowd on the carp devices (serveral >> softlfowd istances then) >> or better to run it on the psyical interface like now (fxp0)? >> > > I would guess that it would be better to run it on the carp interfaces, > but in a switched environment there should not be too much effective > difference - the physical interface should not be seeing traffic destined > for the virtual arp address of a carp interface when it is in slave mode. > > On the other hand, running multiple instances of softflowd shouldn''t > waste too many cycles. > > -d >
Hi, can the flows be send to one instance of flowd? memic wrote:> even with about 10 instances running? > > Damien Miller wrote: > >> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, memic wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> i have an interface with softflowd running, but since this router is >>> going into a redudant setup >>> i will have carp devices. i will have serveral carp devices on one the >>> interfaces where i running >>> softflowd at the moment, because on this interfaces i have more than one ip. >>> does it make sence to run softflowd on the carp devices (serveral >>> softlfowd istances then) >>> or better to run it on the psyical interface like now (fxp0)? >>> >>> >> I would guess that it would be better to run it on the carp interfaces, >> but in a switched environment there should not be too much effective >> difference - the physical interface should not be seeing traffic destined >> for the virtual arp address of a carp interface when it is in slave mode. >> >> On the other hand, running multiple instances of softflowd shouldn''t >> waste too many cycles. >> >> -d >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > netflow-tools mailing list > netflow-tools at mindrot.org > http://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/netflow-tools >