[j-nsp] gNMI on MX960

[Jared Mauch]

> On Mar 7, 2024, at 10:48 AM, Sebastian Wiesinger via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jared,
> 
> thanks for the answer.
> 
>> The second thing is, does your sensor path actually complete?
> 
> What do you mean by complete?


[edit services analytics]
jared at Router# set sensor asdf resource ? 
Possible completions:
  <resource>           System resource identifier string
  /junos/services/health-monitor/config/  Health monitoring configuration
  /junos/services/health-monitor/data/  Health monitoring data
  /junos/services/ip-tunnel/usage/  PFE sensor for IP Tunnel statistics
  /junos/services/label-switched-path/usage/  PFE sensor for LSP statistics


> 
>> 
>> You may want to try to use a UDP based sensor instead to start to
>> validate the platform will output what you expect, for example:
>> 
>> [..]
>> 
>> This will save a lot of effort/overhead of the certificates etc, and
>> let you make sure the code supports the sensors you expect, and you
>> can use protoc to add in the photo files that might be needed.
>> 
>> I’ve seen Juniper output invalid GPB in cases where the software
>> doesn’t support the sensors.
> 
> I'll try to test it with your example config.
> 
> The goal is to use Telegraf (which has a gNMI input plugin) to get
> gNMI data from multiple vendors (mostly Arista, Juniper) and output it
> to Prometheus and/or InfluxDB.

Yeah, I’ve had a lot of start-stop experience with this myself.

You also want to verify that the sensor paths are available in the code that you want, so are they actually in the tree:

https://apps.juniper.net/telemetry-explorer/select-software?software=Junos%20OS%20Evolved&release=23.1R1&moduleId=All&platform=all&tagId=420294&tagName=lldp