On 02/26/2012 10:55 PM, Frank Cox wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 15:50:32 -0600
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> Most people would just look at the router's own bandwidth measurement
>> or the one at the ISP's end if that is available.
>
> Possibly, but that wouldn't break it down by machine. And in that situation
> I'd think a per-machine breakdown would be useful because then you'd know if
> you should be yelling at the kid, the wife or the family dog when you get the
> ten thousand dollar ISP bill. Again, it just seems like the sort of thing that
> folks would want to be able to track in certain situations. But apparently
> not.
>
>> I thought what made
>> your case uncommon was that you had multiple machines and multiple
>> routers and wanted the measurements for each pairing even though the
>> packets go over the same interfaces with no inherent separation.
>
> The separation is the gateway assignment or the lack thereof (for local
> traffic). But other than that, yep, that's a correct assessment.
>
>> If you added interfaces and subnets for each route you wanted to measure
>> separately the normal tools would work naturally.
>
> Indeed, but that adds a whole new layer of complexity to my network that's not
> really needed for any other purpose.
>
>
Then use "tc" for bandwidth control ( per source IP ) with pipes much
larger then your bandwidth, so you are not limiting, but get only
reports of the usage per source (local) IP.
--
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
(Love is in the Air)
PL Computers
Serbia, Europe
Google is the Mother, Google is the Father, and traceroute is your
trusty Spiderman...
StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
