netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets

To: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets
From: Lincoln Dale <ltd@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 22:44:44 +1000
Cc: Horst von Brand <vonbrand@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.30.0206120829240.799-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020612221925.0283fb18@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 08:33 AM 12/06/2002 -0400, jamal wrote:
> i know of many many folk who use transaction logs from HTTP caches for
> volume-based billing.
> right now, those bills are anywhere between 10% to 25% incorrect.
>
> you call that "extremely limited"?

Surely, you must have better ways to do accounting than this -- otherwise
you deserve to loose money.

many people don't have better ways to do accounting than this.

in the case of Squid and Linux, they're typically using it because its open-source and "free".

they want to use HTTP Caching to save bandwidth (and therefore save money), but they also live in a regime of volume-based billing. (not everywhere on the planet is fixed-$/month for DSL).

the unfortunate solution is to use HTTP Transaction logs, which count payload at layer-7, not payload+headers+retransmissions at layer-3.

> of course, i am doing exactly what Dave said to do -- maintaining my own
> out-of-kernel patch -- but its a pain, i'm sure it will soon conflict with
> stuff and is a damn shame - it isn't much code, but Dave seems pretty
> steadfast that he isn't interested.

You havent proven why its needed. And from the looks of it you dont even
need it.

i don't need it because i already have it in my kernel.
but thats where it ends -- its destined to forever be a private patch.

If 3 people need it, then i would like to ask we add lawn mower
support that my relatives have been asking for the last 5 years.

lawn-mower support sounds like a userspace application to me.


cheers,

lincoln.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>