| To: | greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 09 Jun 2002 21:34:40 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3D039D22.2010805@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <3D029DAF.5040006@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020608.175108.84748597.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <3D039D22.2010805@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 11:23:30 -0700 I need to account for packets on a per-session basis, where a session endpoint is a UDP port. So, knowing global protocol numbers is good, but it is not very useful for the detailed accounting I need. Why can't you just disable the other UDP services, and then there is no question which UDP server/client is causing the drops. Every argument I hear is one out of lazyness. And that is not a reason to add something. Simply put, I don't want to add all of this per-socket counter bumping that only, at best, 1 tenth of 1 percent of people will use. This means that the rest of the world eats the overhead just for this small group that actually uses it. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Network oops, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Network oops, george anzinger |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets, Ben Greear |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets, Mark Mielke |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |