Re: argus_output_stream

Well, that totally worked.  I just didn't infer that ability from the
documentation.

from the ra man page:
"-S argus-udp://set:12345     request argus records via UDP from set, port
12345."

Maybe that should be 'read argus records via UDP from set...'  That would
make the meaning line up with the cisco/jflow/sflow examples underneath.

My $0.02.

Thanks again!
Phil


On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Carter Bullard <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hey Phillip,
> Its suppose to be:
>    ra -S argus-udp://x.y.z.w:port
>
> At least that was what we intended  ????
> Carter
>
> [image: QoSient] <http://qosient.com/>
> Carter Bullard  <[email protected]>• CTO
> 150 E 57th Street Suite
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=150+E+57th+Street+Suite%C2%A012D+New+York,+New+York&entry=gmail&source=g>
>  12D
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=150+E+57th+Street+Suite%C2%A012D+New+York,+New+York&entry=gmail&source=g>
> New York, New York
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=150+E+57th+Street+Suite%C2%A012D+New+York,+New+York&entry=gmail&source=g>
> 10022-2795
> Phone +1.212.588.9133 <(212)%20588-9133> • Mobile +1.917.497.9494
> <(917)%20497-9494>
>
> On Nov 1, 2017, at 4:28 PM, Phillip Deneault <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I've got a use-case which would be perfect to use argus to push data via
> argus_output_stream.  Instead of going to a multicast address, it would be
> great if it could simply go to a single address.  If I do point argus-udp
> to a unicast address, it _seems_ to work, as packets are sent to the other
> destination on udp/561. Huzzah!
>
> However... what do I set up on the other side to listen for this traffic?
> Argus listens on TCP port, as does all the other ra* services according to
> the docs.
>
> I can't just change argus-udp to argus-tcp in Argus... as it throws this
> error...
>
> argus: ArgusError: 01 Nov 17 16:24:29.706660 ArgusInitOutput: open
> argus-tcp://<ip>:561: No such file or directory
>
> Thoughts?  I'm thinking(hoping) there's already a feature somewhere that's
> just not documented well enough for me to understand.
>
> Thanks,
> Phil
>
>