Figure 1: Low latency software defined networking control loop

The articles SDN and delay and Delay and stability describe the critical importance of low measurement delay in constructing stable and effective controls. This article will examine the difference in measurement latency between sFlow and NetFlow/IPFIX and their relative suitability for driving control decisions.

Figure 2: sFlow and NetFlow agent architectures

Figure 2 illustrates shows the architectural differences between the sFlow and IPFIX/NetFlow instrumentation in a switch:

1. NetFlow/IPFIX Cisco NetFlow and IPFIX (the IETF standard based on NetFlow) define a protocol for exporting flow records. A flow record summarizes a set of packets that share common attributes - for example, a typical flow record includes ingress interface, source IP address, destination IP address, IP protocol, source TCP/UDP port, destination TCP/UDP port, IP ToS, start time, end time, packet count and byte count. Figure 2 shows the steps performed by the switch in order to construct flow records. First the stream of packets is likely to be sampled (particularly in high-speed switches). Next, the sampled packet header is decoded to extract key fields. A hash function is computed over the keys in order to look up the flow record in the flow cache. If an existing record is found, its values are updated, otherwise a record is created for the new flow. Records are flushed from the cache based on protocol information (e.g. if a FIN flag is seen in a TCP packet), a timeout, inactivity, or when the cache is full. The flushed records are finally sent to the traffic analysis application.
2. sFlow With sFlow monitoring, the decode, hash, flow cache and flush functionality are no longer implemented on the switch. Instead, sampled packet headers are immediately sent to the traffic analysis application which decodes the packets and analyzes the data. In addition, sFlow provides a polling function, periodically sending standard interface counters to the traffic analysis applications, eliminating the need for SNMP polling, see Link utilization. 

Figure 3: Latency of large flow detection using sFlow and NetFlow

The charts in Figure 3 show how each technology reports on a large data transfer. The charts have been aligned to have the same time axis so you can easily compare them. The vertical blue line indicates the start of the data transfer.

1. sFlow By analyzing the continuous stream of sFlow messages from the switch, sFlow-RT immediately detects and continuously tracks the data transfer from the moment the data transfer starts to its completions just over two minutes later.
2. NetFlow The Real-Time NetFlow Analyzer doesn‘t report on the transfer until it receives the first NetFlow record 60 seconds after the data transfer started, indicated by the first vertical red line. The 60 delay corresponds to the active timeout used to flush records from the flow cache. A second NetFlow record, indicated by the second red line, is responsible for the second spike 60 seconds later, and a final NetFlow record, received after the transfer completes and indicated by the third red line, is responsible for the third spike in the chart.

[转]Rapidly detecting large flows, sFlow vs. NetFlow/IPFIX,布布扣,bubuko.com

[转]Rapidly detecting large flows, sFlow vs. NetFlow/IPFIX