Dear Vesna Thank you for your explanation and Thank others for their reply. I think only this reason prevents you to make a software probe : - It is easier to tamper with the results. This is also why we chose not to release a software version in tandem with the hardware solution . And I think the hardware problem could be solved by changing the LAN chipset ( Maybe TPLink do this for you). On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Philip Homburg <philip.homburg@ripe.net> wrote:
Hi Shahin,
On 2014/11/26 15:56 , Shahin Gharghi wrote:
The other way to save probes is making probes multi-home. For example I have 4 probes in one place to monitor 4 different IP prefixes and paths. I know because of the hardware limits we can't use sub-interfaces but we can set 4 IP addresses manually and add 4 any route by the source, then we can save 3 other probes.
One thing to keep in mind is that there are very good reasons to try to keep probes as simple as possible. Even if that means installing 4 probes in one location.
Extra complexity translates into extra testing effort and more bugs. What is gained by using the hardware more efficiently can be lost easily in more engineering effort.
At this moment, making a probe multi-homed would be a significant engineering effort because just about all code implicitly assumes that every probe has exactly one interface.
(I assume that from a hardware point of view, VLAN tagging would allow a probe to be connect to different ethernets)
Philip
-- Shahin Gharghi