[lkml]   [2002]   [Jun]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 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.



To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:22    [W:0.166 / U:4.396 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site