New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
VLAN graphs shows same data for all infrastructures (as they use the same VID) #509
Comments
Right... we also have three infrastructures but they all use a different VLAN so we haven't bumped up against this. Looking at the sflow-to-rrd-handler, the vlan is taken directly from the sflow sample. The fix for this is fairly easy for the graph displaying side:
The problem is Even is we can't move on this quickly @rasssta, it looks like this only affects the vlan graphs (not individual or p2p) via sflow. You can move on this yourself is two ways:
|
Thanks for the update! |
co-incidentally, I noticed this problem yesterday while looking at something else. It's not that difficult to handle in |
## Housekeeping Sept 2021 @barryo closing long running issues (open multiple years). Where appropriate, will:
Additional information: renaming the graphs is a big job and would affect all users. I think the best for now is to reassess this as part of a wider development effort on p2p graphing (i.e. use of time-series databases) and have anyone affected address as above and/or use different tags on different infrastructures. |
ISSUE TYPE
Bug Report
OS
Debian
VERSION
ENVIRONMENT
CONFIGURATION
SUMMARY
We have 3 infrastructures, all of them using VID 203 for the peering VLAN. When looking at VLAN graphs in IXP Manager, all of the 3 infras show the same traffic and when I look at the log it's quite clear why it does that :-)
- - [09/Feb/2019:15:44:07 +0100] "GET /grapher-sflow/ipv6/bytes/aggregate/aggregate.ipv6.bytes.vlan00203.rrd HTTP/1.0" 200 185540 "-" "-"
I'm running sflow collection on a separate server which hasn't received IXP Manager updates in a (long) while and I guess that's why I have run into this problem, or is it a bug? Do you happen to know what files that should be updated to support this new (excellent!) feature?
STEPS TO REPRODUCE
EXPECTED RESULTS
ACTUAL RESULTS
IMPORTANCE
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: