Inferensys

Glossary

Telemetry Collection

The high-frequency, streaming ingestion of real-time network state data—including counters, flow records, and sensor metrics—that serves as the foundational input for the intent assurance loop.
Data scientist building training data pipeline on laptop, data preprocessing visible, technical workspace.
FOUNDATIONAL DATA INGESTION

What is Telemetry Collection?

Telemetry collection is the high-frequency, streaming ingestion of real-time network state data that serves as the foundational input for the intent assurance loop in intent-based networking systems.

Telemetry collection is the automated, high-frequency process of subscribing to and ingesting streaming network state data—including counters, flow records, sensor metrics, and event logs—directly from physical and virtual infrastructure. Unlike traditional polling via SNMP, modern telemetry leverages push-based, model-driven protocols such as gNMI and NETCONF to deliver granular, time-series data at sub-second intervals.

This streaming data forms the ground truth for the closed-loop assurance function, enabling the continuous comparison of the network's actual operational state against the declared network intent. The collected metrics—spanning interface utilization, queue depths, and latency histograms—are fed into intent-based analytics engines to detect intent drift and trigger automated remediation workflows.

REAL-TIME NETWORK VISIBILITY

Key Characteristics of Streaming Telemetry

Streaming telemetry replaces traditional polling with a continuous, high-frequency data push from network devices to collectors, forming the sensory nervous system of the intent assurance loop.

01

Push-Based Data Delivery

Unlike legacy SNMP polling where a management station requests data at intervals, streaming telemetry uses a publish-subscribe model. Devices continuously push state information to configured collectors as soon as changes occur. This eliminates the inherent latency and overhead of request-response cycles, enabling sub-second visibility into network state. Protocols like gRPC Network Management Interface (gNMI) and NETCONF with YANG-Push establish persistent, bidirectional streams that deliver structured data without the CPU penalty of repeated polling queries.

< 1 sec
Typical Push Interval
10x
Overhead Reduction vs. SNMP Polling
02

Model-Driven & Structured Data

Streaming telemetry relies on YANG data models to define the exact structure, syntax, and semantics of the data being streamed. This model-driven approach ensures that both the network device and the collector share a common, machine-readable contract for every metric. Data is serialized in efficient formats like Protocol Buffers (protobuf) or JSON-IETF, eliminating the parsing ambiguity and text-based inefficiency of traditional CLI scraping or SNMP MIBs. This structured payload enables deterministic, code-level consumption by analytics engines.

GPB/JSON
Serialization Formats
03

Cadence-Based & On-Change Subscriptions

Collectors can subscribe to telemetry data using two primary modes. Cadence-based subscriptions deliver data at a fixed, high-frequency interval (e.g., every 500ms), ideal for trend analysis and capacity planning. On-change subscriptions trigger a push only when a monitored data leaf's value actually changes, dramatically reducing bandwidth for stable metrics while providing instantaneous notification of state transitions. This event-driven capability is critical for detecting rapid anomalies like interface flaps or BGP session drops without waiting for the next polling cycle.

500ms
Minimum Cadence
04

High-Resolution Counters & Sensors

Streaming telemetry exposes granular, high-cardinality data paths that are invisible to traditional monitoring. This includes per-queue packet drops, individual flow table utilization on switches, and real-time environmental sensor readings like optical transceiver temperature and voltage. By streaming raw counters at high frequency, the assurance loop can calculate precise microburst detection and derive second-by-second utilization trends. This granularity is the foundational input for machine learning models performing predictive anomaly detection and dynamic resource optimization.

100k+
Unique Sensor Paths per Device
05

Dial-Out & Dial-In Transport

Streaming telemetry supports flexible transport architectures to fit any security posture. In dial-out mode, the network device initiates a TCP connection to an external collector, ideal for environments where devices sit behind firewalls or NAT. In dial-in mode, the collector establishes a gRPC session directly to the device. Both modes leverage TLS encryption for secure transport. This flexibility ensures that telemetry can be collected from distributed edge sites, cloud-native network functions, and core data center fabrics without complex firewall reconfiguration.

TLS 1.3
Encryption Standard
06

Foundation for Closed-Loop Assurance

Streaming telemetry is the critical data ingestion layer that enables the intent assurance loop. The continuous flow of real-time state data is fed into a time-series database and analyzed by the intent engine. This engine compares the operational telemetry against the declared Service-Level Objectives (SLOs). If a deviation is detected—such as latency exceeding a defined threshold—the closed-loop system triggers an automated remediation workflow to restore compliance, completing the observe-orient-decide-act cycle without human intervention.

Real-Time
Assurance Loop Latency
TELEMETRY COLLECTION

Frequently Asked Questions

Explore the foundational mechanisms of streaming network state data that power the intent assurance loop in AI-enhanced radio access networks.

Telemetry collection is the high-frequency, streaming ingestion of real-time network state data that serves as the foundational input for the intent assurance loop. Unlike traditional polling mechanisms like SNMP, modern telemetry uses a push-based model where network devices continuously stream granular operational data—counters, flow records, and sensor metrics—to centralized collectors. This data provides the ground truth against which the intent engine compares the declared business policy. The collection infrastructure must handle massive throughput, often processing millions of data points per second from distributed RAN nodes, to enable sub-second detection of intent drift and trigger automated remediation workflows.

DATA COLLECTION PARADIGM COMPARISON

Streaming Telemetry vs. SNMP Polling

A technical comparison of the two primary mechanisms for collecting network state data in modern intent-based networking architectures.

FeatureStreaming TelemetrySNMP PollingHybrid Approach

Data Collection Model

Push-based: device streams data continuously

Pull-based: manager polls device at intervals

Push for critical metrics; pull for inventory

Transport Protocol

gRPC, TCP, UDP, or HTTP/2

UDP (SNMP traps) or TCP (SNMP informs)

gRPC for telemetry; SNMP for legacy devices

Data Encoding

JSON, Protobuf, or XML

ASN.1 (Abstract Syntax Notation One)

Protobuf for structured data; ASN.1 for MIBs

Sampling Resolution

Sub-second to millisecond

Typically 15 seconds to 5 minutes

Sub-second for KPIs; 5-minute for counters

CPU Overhead on Device

Low: single subscription, no per-request processing

High: per-OID polling consumes CPU cycles

Low on modern nodes; moderate on legacy

Scalability

High: single subscription per collector

Low: polling overhead scales linearly with OIDs

High for greenfield; constrained by brownfield

Data Loss Tolerance

Minimal: persistent streaming with backpressure

High: missed polls create data gaps

Streaming for loss-sensitive; SNMP for best-effort

Configuration Complexity

Moderate: requires YANG model and subscription setup

Low: widely understood, mature tooling

High: dual-stack management overhead

Prasad Kumkar

About the author

Prasad Kumkar

CEO & MD, Inference Systems

Prasad Kumkar is the CEO & MD of Inference Systems and writes about AI systems architecture, LLM infrastructure, model serving, evaluation, and production deployment. Over 5+ years, he has worked across computer vision models, L5 autonomous vehicle systems, and LLM research, with a focus on taking complex AI ideas into real-world engineering systems.

His work and writing cover AI systems, large language models, AI agents, multimodal systems, autonomous systems, inference optimization, RAG, evaluation, and production AI engineering.