+1 for intermapper by a country mile.
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Scott Pettit
Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011 8:47 a.m.
Subject: Re: [nznog] Nagios vs. OpenNMS vs. SomethingElse
Intermapper works great for us, handles dependancies, has configurable
timers for flapping, and all the usual + traps. Remote Access is nice,
engineers can bring it up from anywhere on their screen with full maps
displayed rather than just a list of probes. It's cheap. For logging
Splunk works well.
We've looked at free options but nothing seems to do the job without a
ton of scripting and multiple packages.
What we don't like is the cost of Intermapper Flows - ideally we'd like
to have NetFlow monitoring on everything, but at $300 USD per router +
maintenance, it's hard to justify. If anyone knows of decent NetFlow
analysers that are less costly for 200+ routers, I'd like to hear about
From: Jonathan Brewer <jon.brewer(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 03:18:02 -0700
To: "nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz" <nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz>
Subject: [nznog] Nagios vs. OpenNMS vs. SomethingElse
If you had it all to do over again, what would you use for network
monitoring: Nagios, OpenNMS, or something else entirely?
I care about availaility, latency, loss, jitter, and trap handling for
interface up/down, loss of power, etc. Sensible behavior in situations
where parent routers/links are flapping is also important.
I would very much appreciate input from folks monitoring 1000+ network