Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 23 Jun 2002 12:05:44 +1000 | From | Lincoln Dale <> | Subject | Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets |
| |
g'day Alan,
At 03:03 AM 23/06/2002 +0100, you 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"? > >It wouldnt help you anyway. Prove which frames were not due to the >overloading and congestion/errors on your network which therefore the >customer should >not have a duty to pay. Account for bitstuffing on HDLC links...
sure - but these are all Layer-8 (politics) and layer-9 (religion) issues.
typically Service Providers on this side of the planet handle that side of things via SLAs internal to their own network. i.e. "we guarantee X% uptime, less than Y% packet-loss across our own core network as measured using XXYYZZ method".
the fact that an IP packet may have a PPP header on it across one hop, a HDLC header across another, perhaps some MPLS labels across another, 802.1q-in-802.1q across another is generally immaterial. if you did want to get fancy and account for it, at least you have packet-counters on a per-socket basis from which to do that with. without per-socket accounting, you just don't have that anyway.
cheers,
lincoln.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |