On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 01:27:28PM +0800, Ying-Chieh Liao wrote:
> my previous kernel is about May 10, and the fxp works fine for me
> but I cvsuped and make world/kernel yesterday (6/26), and then terrible thing
> happens... the connection becomes v...e...r...y... s...l...o...w...
> my ping time t
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 07:05:57PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
...
> > that an ISP is likely to charge for and have the tables 'reaped every
> > now and then by a daemon to give a time dimension to the data..
>
> Well, the case that this code was designed for was passive monitoring of
> many IPs
On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 07:36:51 +0200, Kirill Ponomarew wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 01:27:28PM +0800, Ying-Chieh Liao wrote:
> > my previous kernel is about May 10, and the fxp works fine for me
> > but I cvsuped and make world/kernel yesterday (6/26), and then terrible thing
> > happens... t
my previous kernel is about May 10, and the fxp works fine for me
but I cvsuped and make world/kernel yesterday (6/26), and then terrible thing
happens... the connection becomes v...e...r...y... s...l...o...w...
my ping time to the gateway is about 8000ms (but sometimes 20ms)
I've browse the mail
Julian Elischer wrote:
I'm not sure I understand why not just tell ipfw to count all packets
that an ISP is likely to charge for and have the tables 'reaped every
now and then by a daemon to give a time dimension to the data..
That was my thought, though the OP isn't using ipfw, and I'm
woefully ig
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand why not just tell ipfw to count all packets
> that an ISP is likely to charge for and have the tables 'reaped every
> now and then by a daemon to give a time dimension to the data..
Well, the case that this code was designe
I'm not sure I understand why not just tell ipfw to count all packets
that an ISP is likely to charge for and have the tables 'reaped every
now and then by a daemon to give a time dimension to the data..
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Robert Watson wrote:
> On 24 Jun 2003, Adam wrote:
>
> > My ISP is pl
On 24 Jun 2003, Adam wrote:
> My ISP is placing strict restrictions on how much I can transfer each
> month, with high penalties for exceeding their limits. However, they
> don't provide any way for their customer's to check to see how much
> they've transferred, so we end up transferring far less
Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> > I would suggest that you find out exacly how they measure your
> > traffic useage. ie do they measure only packets that were switched
> > by their router or just any and every single byte that their
> > router's ethernet interface sees. The first is IMHO much more
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 09:53:31AM +0200, Ian Freislich wrote:
>
> Won't that count all the ethernet frames and local ethernet broadcasts
> which probably won't be billed for? We had this problem using
> router (ethernet) interface counters to measure traffic in our
> hosting center. The trouble
Adam,
i recommend using ipa, its part of the ports directory, latest is 1.3.4
in short you add an ipf rule to 'count' traffic on your
given interface (setup individual rules for the main ports such as 80/tcp
and 25/tcp). The ipa config file then references those count rules
to keep a database of t
Lars Eggert wrote:
> Adam wrote:
> > My ISP is placing strict restrictions on how much I can transfer each
> > month, with high penalties for exceeding their limits. However, they
> > don't provide any way for their customer's to check to see how much
> > they've transferred, so we end up transferr
12 matches
Mail list logo
