Community
- Command Central
- MVP Program
- Monthly Mission
- Blogs
- Groups
- Events
- Media Vault
Products
- Observability
- Network Management
- Application Management
- IT Security
- IT Service Management
- System Management
- Database Management
Content Exchange
- SolarWinds Platform
- Server & Application Monitor
- Database Performance Analyzer
- Server Configuration Monitor
- Network Performance Monitor
- Network Configuration Manager
- SQL Sentry
- Web Help Desk
Free Tools & Trials

NTA and WAN Optimization-incorrect information reported

Hi,

recently we have installed Cisco WAN optimizers (WAE devices) at our branch offices and the head office as well.

The WAN optimizers are connected to the WAN routers through the LAN switch on a separate VLAN (router on a stick configuration). At the branch offices, that is.

The MPLS (WAN) routers redirect the inbound and outbound traffic to the WAN optimizers using the WCCP protocol which effectively automatically creates Tunnel0,Tunnel1 and Tunnel2 interfaces on the routers.

Netflow version 9 (both directions Ingress/Egress) has been enabled on the WAN, and LAN inerfaces (router on a stick).

The issue:

NTA is not reporting correct information. The WAN link is a 10Mbps line. NTA reports traffic running at 20Mbps and more over that link. Technically it is not possible.

I am wondering whether it has to do with this:

http://www.plixer.com/blog/scrutinizer/netflow-version-9-egress-vs-ingress/

and whether there is anything we can do to change it and make NTA report correct information. Currently we cannot depend on it.

Many thanks for your ideas,

ge0rge

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

All comments

stephen.black

Did you ever get any answers on this issue? We too are seeing the same incorrect info from Orion when we compare it against the actual reports from the Riverbeds. Since we want to mvoe to Orion as our be all end all for monitoring and reporting it is really important I find out how to fix this report. Any help would be most welcomed. Thanks in advance.

Just to confirm, we are seeing negative numbers for the %s in the reprots when the Riverbed reports show positive values. The Riverbed is correct.