Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison among main wireless network monitoring tools

From: A survey on data analysis on large-Scale wireless networks: online stream processing, trends, and challenges

Monitoring Tool



Main features


- Simple usage

- Unsuitable for large networks

Collect information about device and network states described in MIBs using a polling mechanism


- Large delays due to polling


- No authentication


- High computational demand



- Flexible

- Overload in routers and switches

Protocol for flow analysis that collects and aggregate information in a central server


- Granular and agreggated data collection and analysis

- Limited visibility of traffic


- Use of templates

- Proprietary protocol



- Open protocol incorporated in devices of different manufacturers

- Messages without encription

Protocol for flow analysis through random sampling of data packets


- Flexible

- Less packet details when compared to NetFlow


- Low computational demand

- Accuracy issues when high sampling is required



- Flexible

- Complex multistage process in templating

Evolution of NetFlow which is able to export traffic information from Layer 2 to Layer 7


- Variable lenght fields

- Delays due to miss template packets


- Data types defined by the user


- Multi-layer packet monitoring



- Open protocol


- Flexible

- Authentication issues

Real-time traffic control and monitoring


- Multi-layer forwarding and monitoring table

- Not available in many commercial network devices


- Easy adaptation to new network requirements



- Based on P4

- High network overhead

Reports of network state via the data plane