[j-nsp] NETCONF vs SNMP for monitoring

[Phil Shafer]

Phil Mayers writes:
>  4. Finally, you may find that bulk data collection - e.g. all the 
>counters, all the ARP / ethernet switching table entries - is quicker 
>over Netconf. SNMP results need to be OID-sorted which can be slow, but 
>also the TCP transport can end up being faster than UDP. Test and see 
>which works, but also beware faster collection may mean higher CPU on 
>the monitored device.

SNMP is good for quick responses, but can be problematic for bulk
data collections.  Take a look at the accounting profiles feature
in JUNOS, which can collect values locally on the RE and transfer
them on size or time thresholds via ftp, http, or scp.  Profiles
can record interface states, RE states, MIB variables, or have
custom values supplied by on-box scripts.

The trade offs are delayed transfer, but less impact on the device,
and you get values even during networking issues/outages.

There's an NCE write-up at:

http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos11.4/information-products/topic-collections/nce/accounting-profiles-statistics-logging/accounting-profiles-statistics-logging.pdf

Thanks,
 Phil