Re: ITP (probably) cflowd + arts++
On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 07:31:28PM +0000, Alexander Koch wrote:
> I am thinking whether to package cflowd or not. It needs the arts++
> package (library) and I am not that keen on doing shared libs packages
> (nicely put). Source is on www.caida.org (where else ;-) ...
>
> Anyone who worked with cisco netflows and / or this package
> before? Anyone wanting to tell me I better do not put my hands on
> shared libs?
i know a few people who would love you if you packaged and maintained
libarts++ and cflowd.
they're debian users but haven't really got their heads around the
packaging system, so they've just compiled arts++ and cflowd into
/usr/local. AFAIK, it works for them but they'd be much happier
and much better off it it was packaged for debian...then they could
concentrate on their usage of it and not have to worry too much about
whether it is up to date or not.
in short, they'd probably be eternally grateful.
it would also be a good thing for debian to have the flow collector
package.
hmmm. it would be good++ if there were flow generator programs too
so that linux-based routers could provide data to netflow or cflowd
collectors...anyone know if such a program exists? maybe something that
hooked into ipchains accounting rules...
craig
ps: sorry i couldn't help you with your specific questions...i don't
know much about arts++ and cflowd apart from a general idea of what they
do.
--
craig sanders
Reply to: