Skip to content
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

ARP autodiscovery settings #21

Closed
paulgear opened this issue Nov 2, 2013 · 3 comments
Closed

ARP autodiscovery settings #21

paulgear opened this issue Nov 2, 2013 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@paulgear
Copy link
Member

paulgear commented Nov 2, 2013

Need to decide whether it's a good idea to turn on ARP autodiscovery by default. LibreNMS is supposed to autodiscover things, but ARP autodiscovery might be a bit intensive. On my home install it reported on the first run of the autodiscovery: "21 devices discovered in 223.9 secs". On large networks a discovery like this could run for hours.

One option might be to limit the number of devices autodiscovered in a single run. However, because discovery only runs once every 6 hours, it might take a very long time to effectively discover a moderate-sized network.

To mitigate this, should we set a target time for full discovery, and then calculate how many hosts based on the size of the ARP tables? I could see myself trying to get too clever here...

@supertylerc
Copy link
Contributor

Biggest ARP auto-discovery issue is workstations. Also multiple devices will have multiple ARP entries--recursive ARP discovery will kill ARP discovery times.

If you can specify a single device to run ARP discovery on and NOT follow the rabbit to discover other devices and specify MACs or ports to ignore as known workstations, it may be viable.

@laf
Copy link
Member

laf commented Apr 9, 2015

Quite an old issue this now.

In reality are we actually seeing arp discovery issues? I've seen a few people on irc say they use it on a decent scale (no idea on numbers) and it just works?

I'd like to propose to close this if possible @paulgear

@paulgear
Copy link
Member Author

paulgear commented Apr 9, 2015

Yeah - probably not much point in leaving it open; the default of off makes good sense to me.

@paulgear paulgear closed this as completed Apr 9, 2015
laf referenced this issue in laf/librenms Aug 10, 2015
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 22, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants