ndd accuracy vs. netstat accuracy

[Mott Given]

We are using a 3rd party product to give performance and capacity planning information on our HP-UX servers. The product appears to rely heavily on the "netstat" command to give its network info. I thought that I had heard somewhere that the netstat command had been replaced by "ndd" in HP-UX 11.00 and up, and that the netstat output was no longer 100% accurate. I can't find anything to confirm that ndd should be used instead of netstat to get network info and statistics. Does anyone have any info to confirm or deny this idea?

Mott Given

[Geoff Wild]

Strange, as far as I know, ndd is for getting/setting network parameters - not stats.

netstat should be fine as far as I know.

BTW - which tool are you using?


Rgds...Geoff

[Mott Given]

We are using BMC's Patrol for UNIX Perform/Predict, v6.6.10, to get performance data.

Mott Given

[Ron Kinner]

Don't know about using ndd for stats but netstat -rn is definitely not working as well as it should as far as the stats of packets sent and received goes in our 11.0 with very few patches. Perhaps if we had all the patches then it would be happier but ours is a production network serving 1.6 million subscribers and the prevailing attitude is if it aint broke enough to annoy the customers then don't fix it.

Ron

[RAC_1]

I think user is talking about using following ndd parameter.

ndd -get /dev/tcp tcp_status/udp_status

the netstat uses

netstat -an

I do know, if there is difference in both. I think that both report the same thing.

Anil

[rick jones · Accepted solution]

the 10.20 command _nettune_ is what ndd replaces in 11.0 and up, not netstat. netstat statistics in 11.0 and later should be just as accurate as they were in the past :)