About NetFlow/IPFIX and DPI

Antoine Meillet antoine.meillet at gmail.com
Sat May 10 14:58:58 UTC 2014


Thank you Matt (offlist), Dan, Roland and Paolo for your answers !

Antoine.

On 7 mai 2014, at 18:43, Paolo Lucente <pl+list at pmacct.net> wrote:

> Please note NBAR/NetFlow integration wanted to be an example of
> using NetFlow/ IPFIX as a transport for DPI classification info
> (where classification could be performed with any other in-line
> technology than NBAR).
> 
> Whether NBAR works or does not as a classification technology is
> out of scope for me here - and seems also out of the op request.
> 
> Inline:
> 
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 04:15:44PM +0000, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
> 
>> So, perhaps now we can de-conflate flow telemetry and 'DPI', since the real-life export, collection, and analysis of anything other than layer-4 information via flow telemetry isn't at all commonplace (if it in fact exists at all) on production networks), at this juncture.
> 
> I disagree if anybody conflates here. I don't. I see two disjoint
> pieces: classification technology and transport of classification
> info to a central location. IPFIX, for example, is general (and
> standardized) enough to transport/encapsulate other info than just
> flow info, this might include DPI classification or other stuff.
> You can also read this as: if you have to travel some info, why re
> invent the wheel and not leverage a general-enough, standardized
> transport protocol (that btw you can contribute at any point to
> enhance if not satisfactory enough)?
> 
> And please it's nice to have different positions - no need to escalate.
> 
> Cheers,
> Paolo



More information about the NANOG mailing list