Re: [nznog] Nagios vs. OpenNMS vs. SomethingElse

+1 for intermapper by a country mile. ________________________________ From: nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz [mailto:nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz] On Behalf Of Scott Pettit Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011 8:47 a.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz 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 them. -Scott From: Jonathan Brewer Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 03:18:02 -0700 To: "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 elements.