How To Monitor VoIP Performance In The Real World

It’s one of the most dreaded calls to get for an IT staff member – the one where a user complains about the quality of their VoIP call or video conference. The terms used to describe the problem are reminiscent of a person who brings their car in for service because of a strange sound “ I hear a crackle”, or “it sounds like the other person is in a tunnel” or “I could only hear every other word – and then the call dropped”. None of these are good, and unfortunately, they are all very hard to diagnose.

As an IT professional, we are used to solving problems. We are comfortable in a binary world, something works or it doesn’t and when it doesn’t, we fix the issue so that it does. When a server or application is unavailable, we can usually diagnose and fix the issue and then it works again. But, with VoIP and Video, the situation is not so cut and dried. It’s rare that the phone doesn’t work at all – it usually “works” i.e the phone can make and receive calls, but often the problems are more nuanced; the user is unhappy with the “experience” of the connection. It’s the difference between having a bad meal and the restaurant being closed.

In the world of VoIP, this situation has even been mathematically described (leave it to engineers to come up with a formula). It is called a Mean Opinion Score (MOS) and is used to provide a data point which represents how a user “feels” about the quality of a call. The rating system looks like this:

How To Monitor VoIP Performance In The Real World

Today, the MOS score is accepted as the main standard by which the quality of VoIP calls are measured. There are conditional factors that go into what makes an “OK” MOS score which take into account (among other things) the CODEC which is used in the call. As a rule of thumb, any MOS score below ~3.7 is considered a problem worth investigating, and anything consistently below 2.0 is real issue. *(many organizations use a different # other than 3.7, but it is usually pretty close to this). The main factors which go into generating this score come from 3 KPI’s

  1. Loss
  2. Jitter
  3. Latency / Delay

So, in order to try and bring some rigor to monitoring VoIP quality on a network (and get to the issues before the users get to you) network staff need to monitor the MOS score for VoIP calls. In the real world there are at least three (separate) ways of doing this:

1) The “ACTUAL” MOS score from live calls based on reports from the VoIP endpoints

Some VoIP phones will actually perform measurements of the critical KPI’s (Loss, Jitter, and Latency) and send reports of the call quality to a Call Manager or other server. Most commonly this information is transmitted using the Real Time Control Protocol (RTCP) and may also include RTCP XR (for eXtended Report) data which can provide additional information like Signal to Noise Ratio and Echo level. Support for RTCP / RTCP XR is highly dependent on the phone system being used and in particular the handset being used. If your VoIP system does support RTCP / RTCP XR you will still need a method of capturing and reporting / alarming on the data provided.

2) The “PREDICTED” MOS score based on network quality metrics from a synthetic test call.

Instead of waiting for the phones to tell you there is a problem, many network managers implement a testing system which makes periodic synthetic calls on the network and then gathers the KPI’s from those calls. Generally, this type of testing takes place completely outside of the VoIP phone system and uses vendor software to replicate an endpoint. The software is installed at critical ends of a test path and then the endpoints “call” each other (by sending an RTP stream from one endpoint to another). These systems should be able to exactly mimic the live VoIP system in terms of CODEC used and QoS tagging etc so that the test frames are passed through the network in exactly the same way that a “real” VoIP call would be. These systems can then “predict” the Quality of experience that the network is providing at that moment.

3) The “ACTUAL” MOS score bases on a passive analysis of the live packets on the network.

This is where a passive “probe” product is put into the network and “sniffs” the VoIP calls. It can then inspect that traffic and create a MOS score or other metrics which is useful to determine the current quality of service being experienced by users. This method removes any need for support from the VoIP system and also does not require the network to handle additional test data, but does have some drawbacks as this method can be expensive and may have trouble accurately reading any encrypted VoIP traffic.

Which is best? Well, they both all have their place, and in a perfect world an IT staff would have access to live data and test data in order to troubleshoot an issue. In an even more perfect world, they would be able to correlate that data in real time to other potentially performance impacting information like router / switch performance data and network bandwidth usage (especially on WAN circuits).

In the end, VoIP performance monitoring comes down to having access to all of the critical KPI’s that could be used to diagnose issues and (hopefully) stop users from making that dreaded service call.

How To Monitor VoIP Performance In The Real World

Thanks to NMSaaS for the article.

Can Your Analyzer Handle a VoIP Upgrade?

Your looking at doing an upgrade to your VoIP system, as it approaching end of life.   But your network has changed substantially since your first deployment, making this an ideal time to investigate new VoIP systems and ensure your existing monitoring solution can keep pace with the upgrade.

Here are 4 critical areas for consideration to determine whether your monitoring tools can keep pace with the new demands of a VoIP upgrade.

1. SUPPORTING MORE THAN ONE IT TEAM:

If you have a voice team and a network team, you might live and breathe packet-level details while the voice is accustomed to metrics like jitter, R-Factor, and MOS.

CAN YOUR NETWORK MONITORING SOLUTION PROVIDE VOIP-SPECIFIC QUALITY ASSESSMENTS PLUS PACKET AND TRANSACTION DETAILS FOR PROBLEM RESOLUTION?

Can Your Analyzer Handle a VoIP Upgrade?

2. ADDRESSING CONFIGURATION CHALLENGES:

In rolling out large VoIP deployment systems, device and system misconfigurations can get the best of even the most experienced network team.  To bring VoIP to the desktop ensure you have a proper Network Change and Configiration Management System (NCCM), and run a through  pre-deployment  evalution and you have the monitoring capabilities to ensure for successful implementation.

3. ISOLATING THE ROOT CAUSE:

If users are or departments are experiencing bad MOS scores. How quickly can you navigate to the source of the problem? Your analyzer should be able to determine whether the call manager or a bad handset might be at the root of your VoIP frustrations?  The analyzer should be able to isolate the source of quality problems.

4. SUPPORTING MULTI-VENDOR INSTALLATIONS:

Does you network analyzer provide detailed tracking for multiple VoIP vendors? Your monitoring solution needs to understand how each VoIP system/vendor handles calls. Otherwise you will have to toggle between multiple screens to troubleshoot. Without this support, you may be forced to toggle between multiple screens to troubleshoot or reconcile various quality metrics to assess VoIP performance.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the changes in the environment, ensuring rapid problem isolation, tackling potential configuration challenges, and assessing your solution’s support for multiple vendors are the keys to ensuring a successful rollout.

Improving Network Visibility – Part 4: Intelligent, Integrated, and Intuitive Management

In the three previous blogs in this series, I answered an often asked customer question – “What can really be done to improve network visibility?” – with discussions on data and packet conditioning, advanced filtering, and automated data center capability. In the fourth part of this blog series, I’ll reveal another set of features that can further improve network visibility and deliver even more verifiable benefits.

Too quickly summarize, this multi-part blog covers an in-depth view of various features that deliver true network visibility benefits. There are five fundamental feature sets that will be covered:

  • Data & Packet Conditioning
  • Advanced Packet Filtering
  • Automated Real Time Response Capability
  • Intelligent, Integrated, and Intuitive Management
  • Vertically-focused Solution Sets

When combined, these capabilities can “supercharge” your network. This is because the five categories of monitoring functionality work together to create a coherent group of features that can, and will, lift the veil of complexity. These feature sets need to be integrated, yet modular, so you can deploy them to attack the complexity. This will allow you to deliver the right data to your monitoring and security tools and ultimately solve your business problems.

This fourth blog focuses on intelligent, integrated, and intuitive management of your network monitoring switches – also known as network packet brokers (NPB). Management of your equipment is a key concern. If you spend too much time on managing equipment, you lose productivity. If you don’t have the capability to properly manage all the equipment facets, then you probably won’t derive the full value from your equipment.

When it comes to network packet brokers, the management of these devices should align to your specific needs. If you purchase the right NPBs, the management for these devices will be intelligent, integrated, and intuitive.

So, what do we mean by intelligent, integrated, and intuitive? The following are the definitions I use to describe these terms and how they can control/minimize complexity within an element management system (EMS):

Intuitive – This is involves a visual display of information. Particularly, an easy to read GUI that shows you your system, ports, and tool connections at a glance so you don’t waste time or miss things located on a myriad of other views.

Integrated – Everyone wants the option of “One Stop Shopping.” For NPBs, this means no separate executables required for basic configuration. Best-of-breed approaches often sound good, but the reality of integrating lots of disparate equipment can become a nightmare. You’ll want a monitoring switch that has already been integrated by the manufacturer with lots of different technologies. This gives you the flexibility you want without the headaches.

Intelligent – A system that is intelligent can handle most of the nitpicky details, which are usually the ones that take the most effort and reduce productivity the most. Some examples include: the need for a powerful filtering engine behind the scenes to prevent overlap filtering and eliminate the need to create filtering tables, auto-discovery, ability to respond to commands from external systems, and the ability to initiate actions based upon user defined threshold limits.

At the same time, scalability is the top technology concern of IT for network management products, according to the EMA report Network Management 2012: Megatrends in Technology, Organization and Process published in February 2012. A key component of being able to scale is the management capability. Your equipment management capability will throttle how well your system scales or doesn’t.

The management solution for a monitoring switch should be flexible but powerful enough to allow for growth as your business grows – it should be consistently part of the solution and not the problem and must, therefore, support current and potential future needs. The element management system needs to allow for your system growth either natively or through configuration change. There are some basic tiered levels of functionality that are needed. I’ve attempted to summarize these below but more details are available in a whitepaper.

Basic management needs (these features are needed for almost all deployments)

  • Centralized console – Single pane of glass interface so you can see your network at a glance
  • The ability to quickly and easily create new filters
  • An intuitive interface to easily visualize existing filters and their attributes
  • Remote access capability
  • Secure access mechanisms

Small deployments – Point solutions of individual network elements (NEs) (1 to 3) within a system

  • Simple but powerful GUI with a drag and drop interface
  • The ability to create and apply individual filters
  • Full FCAPS (fault, configuration, accounting, performance, security) capability from a single interface

Clustered solutions – Larger solutions for campuses or distributed environments with 4 to 6 NEs within a system

  • These systems need an EMS that can look at multiple monitoring switches from a single GUI
  • More points to control also requires minimal management and transmission overhead to reduce clutter on the network
  • Ability to create filter templates and libraries
  • Ability to apply filter templates to multiple NE’s

Large systems – Require an EMS for large scale NE control

  • Need an ability for bulk management of NE’s
  • Require a web-based (API) interface to existing NMS
  • Need the ability to apply a single template to multiple NE’s
  • Need role-based permissions (that offer the ability to set and forget filter attributes, lock down ports and configuration settings, “internal” multi-tenancy, security for “sensitive” applications like CALEA, and user directory integration – RADIUS, TACACS+, LDAP, Active Directory)
  • Usually need integration capabilities for reporting and trend analysis

Integrated solutions – Very large systems will require integration to an external NMS either directly or through EMS

  • Need Web-based interface (API) for integration to existing NMS and orchestration systems
  • Need standardized protocols that allow external access to monitoring switch information (SYSLOG, SNMP)
  • Require role-based permissions (as mentioned above)
  • Requires support for automation capabilities to allow integration to data center and central office automation initiatives
  • Must support integration capabilities for business Intelligence collection, trend analysis, and reporting

Statistics should be available within the NPB, as well as through the element management system, to provide business intelligence information. This information can be used for instantaneous information or captured for trend analysis. Most enterprises typically perform some trending analysis of the data network. This analysis would eventually lead to a filter deployment plan and then also a filter library that could be exported as a filter-only configuration file loadable through an EMS on other NPBs for routine diagnostic assessments.

More information on the Ixia Net Tool Optimizer (NTO) monitoring switch and advanced packet filtering is available on the Ixia website. In addition, we have the following resources available:

  • Building Scalability into Visibility Management
  • Best Practices for Building Scalable Visibility Architectures
  • Simplify Network Monitoring whitepaper

Additional Resources:

Ixia Net Tool Optimizer (NTO)

White Paper: Building Scalability into Visibility Management

Ixia Visibility Solutions

Thanks to Ixia for the article. 

“Who Makes the Rules?” The Hidden Risks of Defining Visibility Policies

Imagine what would happen if the governor of one state got to change all the laws for the whole country for a day, without the other states or territories ever knowing about it. And then the next day, another governor gets to do the same. And then another.

Such foreseeable chaos is precisely what happens when multiple IT or security administrators define traffic filtering policies without some overarching intelligence keeping tabs on who’s doing what. Each user acts from their own unique perspective with the best of intentions –but with no way to know how the changes they make might impact other efforts.

In most large enterprises, multiple users need to be able to view and alter policies to maximize performance and security as the network evolves. In such scenarios, however, “last in, first out” policy definition creates dangerous blind spots, and the risk may be magnified in virtualized or hybrid environments where visibility architectures aren’t fully integrated.

Dynamic Filtering Accommodates Multiple Rule-makers, Reduces Risk of Visibility Gap

Among the advances added to latest release of Ixia’s Net Tool Optimizer™ (NTO) network packet brokers are enhancements to the solution’s unique Dynamic Filtering capabilities. This patented technique imposes that overarching intelligence over the visibility infrastructure as multiple users act to improve efficiency or divert threats. This technology becomes an absolute requirement when automation is used in the data center as dynamic changes to network filters require advanced calculations to other filters to ensure overlaps are updated to prevent loss of data.

Traditional rule-based systems may give a false sense of security and leave an organization vulnerable as security tools don’t see everything they need to see in order to do their job effectively. Say you have 3 tools each requiring slightly different but overlapping data.

  • Tool 1 wants a copy of all packets on VLAN 1-3
  • Tool 2 wants a copy of all packets containing TCP
  • Tool 3 wants a copy of all packets on VLAN 3-6

Overlap occurs in that both Tools 1 and 3 need to see TCP on VLAN 3. In rule-based systems, once a packet matches a rule, it is forwarded on and no longer available. Tool 1 will receive TCP packets on VLAN 3 but not tool 3. This creates a false sense of security because tool 3 still receives data and is not generating an alarm, which would indicate all is well. But what if the data stream going to tool 1 contains the smoking gun? Tool 3 would have detected this. And as we know from recent front-page breaches, a single incident can ruin a company’s brand image and have a severe financial impact.

Extending Peace of Mind across Virtual Networks

NVOS 4.3 also integrates physical and virtual visibility, allowing traffic from Ixia’s Phantom™ Virtualization Taps (vTaps) or standard VMware-based visibility solutions to be terminated on NTO along with physical traffic. Together, these enhancements eliminate serious blind spots inherent in other solutions avoiding potential risk and, worst case, liability caused by putting data at risk.

Integrating physical and virtual visibility minimizes equipment costs and streamlines control by eliminating extra devices that add complexity to your network. Other new additions –like the “double your ports” feature extend the NTO advantage delivering greater density, flexibility and ROI.

Download the latest NTO NVOS release from www.ixiacom.com.

Additional Resources:

Ixia Visibility Solutions

Thanks to Ixia for the article. 

Infosim® Global Webinar Day June 25th, 2015 – Convince Your Boss that You Need a New iPhone: Introducing the New StableNet® Mobile App

Join Dr. David Hock, Senior Consultant R&D, and Eduardo González, Developer & Consultant, for a Webinar on “The new StableNet® Mobile App”.

This Webinar will provide insight into:

  • How will the StableNet® Mobile App make your life easier?
  • How are Apple™ Swift and the StableNet® REST API maximizing the user experience?
  • What functionality does the StableNet® Mobile App bring to your fingertips? [Live Demo]
  • When can you get the Mobile App for your StableNet® infrastructure?

A recording of this Webinar will be available to all who register!

b2ap3_thumbnail_Fotolia_33050826_XS.jpg

(Take a look at our previous Webinars here.)

Advanced Packet Filtering with Ixia’s Advanced Filtering Modules (AFM)

An important factor in improving network visibility is the ability to pass the correct data to monitoring tools. Otherwise, it becomes very expensive and aggravating for most enterprises to sift through the enormous amounts of data packets being transmitted (now and in the near future). Bandwidth requirements are projected to continue increasing for the foreseeable future – so you may want to prepare now. As your bandwidth needs increase, complexity increases due to more equipment being added to the network, new monitoring applications, and data filtering rule changes due to additional monitoring ports.

Network monitoring switches are used to counteract complexity with data segmentation. There are several features that are necessary to perform the data segmentation needed and refine the flow of data. The most important features needed for this activity are: packet deduplication, load balancing, and packet filtering. Packet filtering, and advanced packet filtering in particular, is the primary workhorse feature for this segmentation.

While many monitoring switch vendors have filtering, very few can perform the advanced filtering that adds real value for businesses. In addition, filtering rules can become very complex and require a lot of staff time to write initially and then to maintain as the network constantly changes. This is time and money wasted on tool maintenance instead of time spent on quickly resolving network problems and adding new capabilities to the network requested by the business.

Basic Filtering

Basic packet filtering consists of filtering the packets as they either enter or leave the monitoring switch. Filtering at the ingress will restrict the flow of data (and information) from that point on. This is most often the worst place to filter as tools and functionality downstream from this point will never have access to that deleted data, and it eliminates the ability to share filtered data to multiple tools. However, ingress filtering is commonly used to limit the amount of data on the network that is passed on to your tool farm, and/or for very security sensitive applications that wish to filter non-trusted information as early as possible.

The following list provides common filter criteria that can be employed:

  • Layer 2
    • MAC address from packet source
    • VLAN
    • Ethernet Type (e.g. IPv4, IPv6, Apple Talk, Novell, etc.)
  • Layer 3
    • DSCP/ECN
    • IP address
    • IP protocol ( ICMP, IGMP, GGP, IP, TCP, etc.)
    • Traffic Class
    • Next Header
  • Layer 4
    • L4 port
    • TCP Control flags

Filters can be set to either pass or deny traffic based upon the filter criteria.

Egress filters are primarily meant for fine tuning of data packets sent to the tool farm. If an administrator tries to use these for the primary filtering functionality, they can easily run into an overload situation where the egress port is overloaded and packets are dropped. In this scenario, aggregated data from multiple network ports may be significantly greater than the egress capacity of the tool port.

Advanced Filtering

Network visibility comes from reducing the clutter and focusing on what’s important when you need it. One of the best ways to reduce this clutter is to add a monitoring switch that can remove duplicated packets and perform advanced filtering to direct data packets to the appropriate monitoring tools and application monitoring products that you have deployed on your network. The fundamental factor to achieve visibility is to get the right data to the right tool to make the right conclusions. Basic filtering isn’t enough to deliver the correct insight into what is happening on the network.

But what do we mean by “advanced filtering”? Advanced filtering includes the ability to filter packets anywhere across the network by using very granular criteria. Most monitoring switches just filter on the ingress and egress data streams.

Besides ingress and egress filtering, operators need to perform packet processing functions as well, like VLAN stripping, VNtag stripping, GTP stripping, MPLS stripping, deduplication and packet trimming.

Ixia’s Advanced Feature Modules

The Ixia Advanced Feature Modules (AFM) help network engineers to improve monitoring tool performance by optimizing the monitored network traffic to include only the essential information needed for analysis. In conjunction with the Ixia Net Tool Optimizer (NTO) product line, the AFM module has sophisticated capability that allows it to perform advanced processing of packet data.

Advanced Packet Processing Features

  • Packet De-Duplication – A normally configured SPAN port can generate multiple copies of the same packet dramatically reducing the effectiveness of monitoring tools. The AFM16 eliminates redundant packets, at full line rate, before they reach your monitoring tools. Doing so will increase overall tool performance and accuracy.
  • Packet Trimming – Some monitoring tools only need to analyze packet headers. In other monitoring applications, meeting regulatory compliance requires tools remove sensitive data from captured network traffic. The AFM16 can remove payload data from the monitored network traffic, which boosts tool performance and keeps sensitive user data secure.
  • Protocol Stripping – Many network monitoring tools have limitations when handling some types of Ethernet protocols. The AFM16 enables monitoring tools to monitor required data by removing GTP, MPLS, VNTag header labels from the packet stream.
  • GTP Stripping – Removes the GTP headers from a GTP packet leaving the tunneled L3 and L4 headers exposed. Enables tools that cannot process GTP header information to analyze the tunneled packets.
  • NTP/GPS Time Stamping – Some latency-sensitive monitoring tools need to know when a packet traverses a particular point in the network. The AFM16 provides time stamping with nanosecond resolution and accuracy.

Additional Resources:

Ixia Advance Features Modules

Ixia Visibility Architecture

Thanks to Ixia for the article. 

Introducing the First Self-Regulating Root Cause Analysis: Dynamic Rule Generation with StableNet® 7

Infosim®, a leading manufacturer of automated Service Fulfillment and Service Assurance solutions for Telcos, ISPs, MSPs and Corporations, today announced a proprietary new technology called Dynamic Rule Generation (DRG) with StableNet® 7.

The challenge: The legacy Fault Management approach includes a built-in dilemma: Scalability vs. Aggregation. On the one hand, it is unfeasible to pre-create all possible rules while on the other hand, not having enough rules will leave NOC personnel with insufficient data to troubleshoot complex scenarios.

The solution: DRG expands and contracts rules that automatically troubleshoot networks by anticipating all possible scenarios from master rule sets. DRG is like cruise control for a network rule set. When DRG is turned on, it can robotically expand and contract rule sets to keep troubleshooting data at optimum levels constantly without human intervention. It will also allow for automatic ticket generation and report alarms raised by dynamically generated rules. DRG leads to fast notification, a swift service Impact Analysis, and results in the first self-regulating Root Cause Analysis in today’s Network Management Software market.

Start automating Fault Management and stop manually creating rules! Take your hands off the keyboard and allow the DRG cruise control to take over!

Supporting Quotes:

Dr. Stefan Köhler, CEO for Infosim® comments:

“We at Infosim® believe you should receive the best value from your network, and exchange of information should be as easy as possible. The way we want to achieve these goals, is to simplify the usage and automate the processes you use to manage your network. Rules creation and deletion has been an Achilles’ heel of legacy network management systems. With DRG (Dynamic Rule Generation), we are again delivering another new technology to our customers to achieve our goal of the dark NOC.”

Marius Heuler, CTO for Infosim® comments:

“By further enhancing the already powerful Root Cause Analysis of StableNet®, we are providing functionality to our users that will both take care of ongoing changes in their networks while automatically keeping the rules up to date.”

ABOUT INFOSIM®

Infosim® is a leading manufacturer of automated Service Fulfillment and Service Assurance solutions for Telcos, ISPs, Managed Service Providers and Corporations. Since 2003, Infosim® has been developing and providing StableNet® to Telco and Enterprise customers. Infosim® is privately held with offices in Germany (Würzburg – Headquarters), USA (Austin) and Singapore.

Infosim® develops and markets StableNet®, the leading unified software solution for Fault, Performance and Configuration Management. StableNet® is available in two versions: Telco (for Telecom Operators and ISPs) and Enterprise (for IT and Managed Service Providers). StableNet® is a single platform unified solution designed to address today’s many operational and technical challenges of managing distributed and mission-critical IT infrastructures.

Many leading organizations and Network Service Providers have selected StableNet® due to its enriched features and reduction in OPEX & CAPEX. Many of our customers are well-known global brands spanning all market sectors. References available on request.

At Infosim®, we take pride in the engineering excellence of our high quality and high performance products. All products are available for a trial period and professional services for proof of concept (POC) can be provided on request.

ABOUT STABLENET®

StableNet® is available in two versions: Telco (for Telecom Operators and ISPs) and Enterprise (for IT and Managed Service Providers).

StableNet® Telco is a comprehensive unified management solution; offerings include: Quad-play, Mobile, High-speed Internet, VoIP (IPT, IPCC), IPTV across Carrier Ethernet, Metro Ethernet, MPLS, L2/L3 VPNs, Multi Customer VRFs, Cloud and FTTx environments. IPv4 and IPv6 are fully supported.

StableNet® Enterprise is an advanced, unified and scalable network management solution for true End-to-End management of medium to large scale mission-critical IT supported networks with enriched dashboards and detailed service-views focused on both Network & Application services.

Thanks to Infosim for the article. 

Security Breaches Keep Network Teams Busy

Network Instruments study shows that network engineers are spending more of their day responding to breaches and deploying security controls.

This should come as no big surprise to most network teams. As security breaches and threats proliferate, they’re spending a lot of time dealing with security issues, according to a study released Monday.

Network Instruments’ eighth annual state of the network report shows that network engineers are increasingly consumed with security chores, including investigating security breaches and implementing security controls. Of the 322 network engineers, IT directors and CIOs surveyed worldwide, 85% said their organization’s network team was involved in security. Twenty percent of those polled said they spend 10 to 20 hours per week on security issues.

Security Breaches Keep Network Teams Busy

Almost 70% said the time they spend on security has increased over the past 12 months; nearly a quarter of respondents said the time spend increased by more than 25%.

The top two security activities keeping networking engineers busy are implementing preventative measures and investigating attacks, according to the report. Flagging anomalies and cleaning up after viruses or worms also are other top time sinks for network teams.

“Network engineers are being pulled into every aspect of security,” Brad Reinboldt, senior product manager for Network Instruments, the performance management unit of JDSU, said in a prepared statement

Security Breaches Keep Network Teams Busy

Network teams are drawn into security investigations and preparedness as high-profile security breaches continue to make headlines. Last year, news of the Target breach was followed by breach reports from a slew of big-name companies, including Neiman Marcus, Home Depot, and Michaels.

A report issued last September by the Ponemon Institute and sponsored by Experian showed that data breaches are becoming more frequent. Of the 567 US executives surveyed, 43 percent said they had experienced a data breach, up from 33% in a similar survey in 2013. Sixty percent said their company had suffered more than one data breach in the past two years, up from 52% in 2013.

According to Network Instruments’ study, syslogs were as the top method for detecting security issues, with 67% of survey respondents reporting using them. Fifty-seven percent use SNMP while 54% said they use anomalies for uncovering security problems.

In terms of security challenges, half of the survey respondents ranked correlating security and network performance as their biggest problem.

The study also found that more than half of those polled expect bandwidth to grow by more than 51% next year, up from the 37% from last year’s study who expected that kind of growth. Several factors are driving the demand, including users with multiple devices, larger data files, and unified communications applications, according to the report.

The survey also queried network teams about their adoption of emerging technologies. It found that year-over-year implementation rates for 40 Gigabit Ethernet, 100GbE, and software-defined networking have almost doubled. One technology that isn’t gaining traction among those polled is 25 GbE, with more than 62% saying they have no plans for it.

Thanks to Network Computing for the article.

What if Sony Used Ixia’s Application and Threat Intelligence Processor (ATIP)?

Trying to detect intrusions in your network and extracting data from your network is a tricky business. Deep insight requires a deep understanding of the context of your network traffic—where are connections coming from, where are they going, and what are the specific applications in use. Without this breadth of insight, you can’t take action to stop and remediate attacks, especially from Advanced Persistent Threats (APT).

To see how Ixia helps its customers gain this actionable insight into the applications and threats on their network, we invite you to watch this quick demo of Ixia’s Application and Threat Intelligence Processor (ATIP) in action. Chief Product Officer Dennis Cox uses Ixia’s ATIP to help you understand threats in real time, with the actual intrusion techniques employed in the Sony breach.

Additional Resources:

Ixia Application and Threat Intelligence Processor

Thanks to Ixia for the article.

End User Experience Testing Made Easier with NMSaaS

End user experience & QoS are consistently ranked at the top of priorities for Network Management teams today. According to research over 60% of companies today say that VoIP is present in a significant amount of their networks, this is the same case with streaming media within the organization.

As you can see having effective end user experience testing is vital to any business. If you have a service model, whether you’re an actual service provider like a 3rd party or you’re a corporation where your IT acts as a service provider you have a certain goal. This goal is to provide assured applications/services to your customers at the highest standard possible.

The success of your business is based upon your ability to deliver effective end user experience. How many times have you been working with a business and have been told to wait because the businesses computers systems were “slow”. It is something which we all have become frustrared with in the past.

b2ap3_thumbnail_angry-user-post-size.jpg

To ensure that your organization can provide effective and successful end user experience you need to be able to proactively test your live environment and be alerted to issues in real time.

This is comprised of 5 key elements:

1) Must be able to test from end-to-end

2) Point to Point or Meshed testing

3) Real traffic and “live” test, not just “ping” and trace route

4) Must be able to simulate the live environments

  • Class of service
  • Number of simultaneous tests
  • Codecs
  • Synthetic login/query

5) Must be cost effective and easy to deploy.

NMSaaS is able to provide all of these service at a cost effective price.

If this is something you might be interested in, or if you would like to find more about our services and solutions – why not start a free 30 day trial today?

b2ap3_thumbnail_file-2229790027.png

Thanks to NMSaaS for the article.