Contents

Talk:Port mirroring

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Networking Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Low-importance).

A typical full duplex port has both a transmit and receive channel, to monitor both the transmit and receive communications you need to mirror both channels on to the mirror port. Note that this means up to twice as much data on the mirror port so you may actually need a faster port! Part of the command you use would probally be: “#monitor session 1 source interface Gi1/0/1 both” Stuartfawcett 16:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It seems like this article has very little content that discuss actual port mirroring and a lot of content that discusses how to do port mirroring on a CISCO switch. I don't think it's normal if you can include a wikipedia page in a product manual... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.61.160.13 (talk) 13:45, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really agree that this is biased in any way as it is just providing a sample of the config but the other wiki pages relating to networking gear (OSPF, RIP, spanning-tree) do not contain config either. The only one I found in a quick search, that contained config, was EIGRP, which is proprietary.

So I propose we change the name of the article to Switched Port Analyzer (SPAN) as there is a lot more documented information which can be referenced for SPAN where as there is virtually none for RAP.

So I propose we rename the article, is that agreeable?

Why on earth would you rename an article about Port Mirroring to anything else? This does not pass common sense test. There is no bias or neutrality issues here. Non-issue. I suggest resolving and removing the banner. 71.4.155.66 (talk) 18:05, 1 September 2011 (UTC)kx[reply]

The name change was suggested as the original person who raised this as biased has done so just because there is only Cisco config shown. The article begins with a brief explanation of what port-mirroring does and gives some examples of the specific names featured on various vendor devices (Cisco and 3COM). Have removed the code example as is not necessary for the explanation and description of port-mirroring (is also completely irrelevant on non-Cisco devices). Can someone please remove the disputed banner now as there is no issue with this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.6.180.244 (talk) 05:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree... and I removed Mateck (talk) 01:16, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that while this page has existed for years, it is still very thin on contents. Several areas of port mirroring are only mentioned in passing and could do with some additional detail.

It is probably best to leave specific configuration of particular devices to the vendors user guides. There are several reasons why I feel this way:

1. Wikipedia should explain what a topic is and how it works. Adding configurations will needlessly clutter any description without contributing a greater understanding
2. Even within a vendors product line, there may be many differences in the specific capabilities offered. Discussing these differences would require constant fact checking and updating without contributing anything that is not already documented by the vendors
3. Many features, including port mirroring, can be configured in many different ways. Discussing the actual configuration of the feature while trying to illuminate the reasons for the differences makes the text less accessible

I hope my contribution has helped make this article better. Molsen123 (talk) 11:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• My edit was reverted due to the lack of references. I will work on that and edit again. Meanwhile, feel free to comment on my previous edit, available in the page history. Molsen123 (talk) 14:02, 12 March 2014 (UTC).[reply]