[j-nsp] NETCONF vs SNMP for monitoring

[Morgan McLean]

Yea multithreading would be the way to go, it's not very intensive, just
sits hanging out waiting for its response. I was reading a paper somebody
wrote on performance for SNMP vs NETCONF, which is here:
http://morse.colorado.edu/~tlen5710/11s/11NETCONFvsSNMP.pdf . Seems to
suggest as workload increases, netconf becomes more favorable. I haven't
tested it in depth; in fact I'm having trouble finding documentation on the
different calls I can make.

Thanks,
Morgan


On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Tyler Christiansen <tyler at adap.tv> wrote:

> SNMP is less resource-intensive and faster than NETCONF.  I would use SNMP
> for the things you can and NETCONF for the things you can't.  If you
> consider NETCONF, it would probably be best to do so in a threaded,
> asynchronous, or multi-process fashion.  I've seen a few SNMP pollers that
> don't use threads or multiple processes or callbacks, and they can get away
> with it.  I don't think NETCONF can.
>
> --tc
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Morgan McLean <wrx230 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just curious if anybody opts to use netconf instead of snmp for monitoring
>> purposes? Any known downsides?
>>
>> SNMP seems to never really be up to date with everything that you might
>> want to have a peek at.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Morgan
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
>
>