[c-nsp] NetFlow for billing on 6500/SUP720-3B

[Keegan Holley]

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 6, 2011, at 9:44 PM, Jon Lewis <jlewis at lewis.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Apr 2011, Wil Schultz wrote:
> 
>> Not netflow, but I use cacti to graph all switchports and aggregate ports as needed into 95th percentile. Works well and there aren't any load concerns on the switchside.
> 
> That's the easiest way...but the trouble is, cacti can't ignore local traffic (so the customers are only billed for "internet" traffic).
> 
> I'm curious to hear what others have to say, but I suspect the OP is SoL.

I would assume it's more common to bill based on snmp than netflow unless you deploy specialized hardware.  Is there really any local traffic on an Internet feed? Also is there really any local traffic that shouldn't be billed?