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

David S. Miller wrote:

   From: Ben Greear [off-list ref]
   Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 17:13:35 -0700
   
   If you're talking per-socket SNMP counters, then that could work.
   General protocol-wide counters would not help much, at least
   in my case.

Why not?  If you know where the drops are occurring, what else
do you need to know?

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.  I could also use per-socket TCP counters, like re-transmits,
etc.  I have not looked to see if they are already there
or not...

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear [off-list ref]       <Ben_Greear AT excite.com>
President of Candela Technologies Inc      http://www.candelatech.com
ScryMUD:  http://scry.wanfear.com     http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear

   From: Ben Greear [off-list ref]
   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.