 DarkLogixPremium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3 | Why not in Real Time? A 3 hour delay what is this the 1890's
and why 3 Mac addresses are they also going to meter voip(lol wth)
you would only need to monitor one the mac of ether the cable modem or the router
(even though this doesn't effect me as I switched to business class at home but still wth) | |
|
  espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| Re: Why not in Real Time? said by DarkLogix:A 3 hour delay what is this the 1890's Do you know of any other network reporting tool that can collect and process data for 14+ million elements in real time?
said by DarkLogix:and why 3 Mac addresses are they also going to meter voip(lol wth) What are you talking about? The stats are based on the HSI cable modem MAC only. | |
|
 | AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | Re: Why not in Real Time? In fairness, both of the DSLR articles mention the rumored ability to monitor multiple MAC addresses but don't exactly explain what that means in practical user usage. | |
|
| Der_Idiot
join:2008-02-10
Norwood Young America, MN | said by espaeth:said by DarkLogix:A 3 hour delay what is this the 1890's Do you know of any other network reporting tool that can collect and process data for 14+ million elements in real time? Yep.
»www.cacti.net/ | |
|
| |  wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Why not in Real Time? said by Der_Idiot:said by espaeth:said by DarkLogix:A 3 hour delay what is this the 1890's Do you know of any other network reporting tool that can collect and process data for 14+ million elements in real time? Yep. » www.cacti.net/ Not according to the Cacti website you just linked to
quote:
All of this is wrapped in an intuitive, easy to use interface that makes sense for LAN-sized installations up to complex networks with hundreds of devices.
Hundreds is a lot easier to track than millions.
--
Комитет государственной безопасности
| |
|
| | | DarkLogixPremium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3 | Re: Why not in Real Time? said by wifi4milez:Not according to the Cacti website you just linked to Hundreds is a lot easier to track than millions. It would only need to track all one one node then have a one for each node
then the data you see would come from the local node | |
|
| | | | espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| Re: Why not in Real Time? said by DarkLogix:said by wifi4milez:Not according to the Cacti website you just linked to Hundreds is a lot easier to track than millions. It would only need to track all one one node then have a one for each node then the data you see would come from the local node It's central reporting, so it's going to need to be logged to a database cluster for the reporting server to be able to access the data.
There are a few key factors that determine how frequently you can represent the data, namely:
- The speed at which you can do row inserts into the database
- The select query rate against a DB that is doing constant inserts
- The quantity of data that your ETL servers can handle to summarize down the data on regular intervals to prevent excessive data growth
- The speed at which your SNMP poller can gather data from the network devices
- The amount of SNMP your network devices can process before CPU loading puts the platform at risk
I've worked with Concord/CA Systems e-Health, HP OpenView, IBM Tivoli Monitoring, Quest/Magnum monitoring tools, and MRTG/RRDTool/Cacti. No company in the marketplace can currently offer realtime data for millions of monitored elements.
Also, cacti's primary polling agent is executed via crond on your *nix box, with a default polling interval of 5 minutes. Cacti is not real-time. | |
|
| | | | | DarkLogixPremium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3 | Re: Why not in Real Time? Well then just don't keep it as centralized
have a Database per CMTS
and that might be serving thousands but should be do able
5min is close enough to real time that you could get an idea of how much each activity uses
I would think most Cablemodems could handle once a min if not then perhaps they shouldn't be on the approved list
have the distributed database servers send summarized usage data to the main central server based but display data to the user from both edge and core databases with the core being 1-24hours old and the edge being the last 1min to 24hours
then have the summary be total over a period of time (ie zxy used 20GB on date abc
I'm sure if planned properly and distributed based on CMTS locations then it would easily be doable | |
|
| DarkLogixPremium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3
1 edit | said by espaeth:said by DarkLogix:A 3 hour delay what is this the 1890's Do you know of any other network reporting tool that can collect and process data for 14+ million elements in real time? said by DarkLogix:and why 3 Mac addresses are they also going to meter voip(lol wth) What are you talking about? The stats are based on the HSI cable modem MAC only. the artical says up to 3 MAC addresses (why)
(ok I see the artical updated from 3 to multiple but still (why)
and track multiple MAC addresses, though not in real time | |
|
 jlivingoodPremium,VIP
join:2007-10-28
Philadelphia, PA
kudos:1 | said by DarkLogix:A 3 hour delay what is this the 1890's What's the use case / need you imagine for having it be completely real-time rather than a several hour delay?
Thanks
Jason
--
JL
Comcast | |
|
|  RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | Re: Why not in Real Time? said by jlivingood:said by DarkLogix:A 3 hour delay what is this the 1890's What's the use case / need you imagine for having it be completely real-time rather than a several hour delay? Thanks Jason To have a warning that I am approaching the limit assuming that the gauge does not have a warning feature where it does a prediction of how much more bandwidth I will use before the end of the month. What I am thinking of is a case where I am nearing the 250GB limit and if I keep going at my daily average will exceed it. The type of prediction of expected usage would be a daily average as well as the more sophisticated creation of a day-of-the-week average (ie: If the daily usage on a weekend is much more than a weekday day). If this information was offered, then so long as your usage pattern stays the same, the need to know your actual up-to-the-minute usage is not needed and a up-until-3-hours-ago is OK since you have been warned that you are going to exceed the limit. The need for more accurate numbers only gets important as the end of the month approaches (since it is then that you need to know if you still have enough bandwidth left). | |
|
| | jlivingoodPremium,VIP
join:2007-10-28
Philadelphia, PA
kudos:1 | Re: Why not in Real Time? said by RARPSL:said by jlivingood:said by DarkLogix:A 3 hour delay what is this the 1890's What's the use case / need you imagine for having it be completely real-time rather than a several hour delay? Thanks Jason To have a warning that I am approaching the limit assuming that the gauge does not have a warning feature where it does a prediction of how much more bandwidth I will use before the end of the month. What I am thinking of is a case where I am nearing the 250GB limit and if I keep going at my daily average will exceed it. The type of prediction of expected usage would be a daily average as well as the more sophisticated creation of a day-of-the-week average (ie: If the daily usage on a weekend is much more than a weekday day). If this information was offered, then so long as your usage pattern stays the same, the need to know your actual up-to-the-minute usage is not needed and a up-until-3-hours-ago is OK since you have been warned that you are going to exceed the limit. The need for more accurate numbers only gets important as the end of the month approaches (since it is then that you need to know if you still have enough bandwidth left). So would getting an email or other form of notification at some arbitrary % of your limit be cool? Like 50%, 70%, 80%, and 90% or something like that?
Jason
--
JL
Comcast | |
|
| | |  funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | Re: Why not in Real Time? said by jlivingood:So would getting an email or other form of notification at some arbitrary % of your limit be cool? Like 50%, 70%, 80%, and 90% or something like that? Jason Of course it would "be cool," but even better, why not focus your efforts on not needing the meter at all?
The more you focus on perfecting metered Internet, the less focus that's applied to putting such backwards concepts into History.
You don't need monthly caps WITH congestion-based deprioritization. The deprioritization scheme, as troubled as I think it is, has the qualities of dealing with network segments under stress and doing something about it. (It's the details of that "something" where we disagreed, not the targeting of where to focus the attention.)
These bandwidth caps can hit people that are doing absolutely nothing wrong, whose network use is careful never to increase latency or interfere with others' use of the network. The 250 GB cap by the biggest cable ISP is a mental cap, if not also a real one, on progress and investment.
Be the role-model of progress. Quit reminding the consumers and the industry how backward you are.
Go back to "unlimited."
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
|
| | | AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
1 edit | said by jlivingood:So would getting an email or other form of notification at some arbitrary % of your limit be cool? Like 50%, 70%, 80%, and 90% or something like that? Jason Absolutely. If we're sending e-mails, one thought might be two e-mails, one at 80% just as a friendly and gentle reminder and one at 95% (or when you're past 100% depending on the intent). | |
|
| | | Will the tool count, or NOT count, all the overhead traffic that the cable modem sees, like ARP traffic?? | |
|
| | espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
| Re: Why not in Real Time? said by fAcEtIOUs:Will the tool count, or NOT count, all the overhead traffic that the cable modem sees, like ARP traffic?? ARP requests have a destination MAC of all F's (broadcast frame), so if they're using the MAC-level CMTS counters then ARP request traffic should be excluded. | |
|
| | | The Internet CSRs can view usage data in real time.
Grandslam is a joke for TV CSR's.
The loosers at JR that wrote the crash ever hour provisioning system, probably wrote the hooks for the web site. What a joke. Its Comcastic all right... | |
|
| DarkLogixPremium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3 | said by jlivingood:said by DarkLogix:A 3 hour delay what is this the 1890's What's the use case / need you imagine for having it be completely real-time rather than a several hour delay? Thanks Jason I would want to know how much I've used as of point X not Point Y
(where Y=X-Ztime) | |
|
| funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | said by jlivingood:What's the use case / need you imagine for having it be completely real-time rather than a several hour delay? Hehe. Do you have any friends that can't go shopping without first stopping at an ATM to check their balance?
(3 hours -- even 24 hours -- is fine with me).
Most people don't realize that hitting 250 GB doesn't mean that they'll get "the call" - it just means that they may if they're also one of the top users. If they're one of the top users and not over 250 GB, they won't get a call. (Theoretically, the 250 GB limit was set so that the lowest of the top 1000 users is still well above it.)
In short: if you find you go to 251 or 252 GB, don't sweat it, but keep watching your usage.
Further, if you've never gotten the call, don't sweat it until you do. The first call is a warning.
The great thing about this whole event is that the process is now disclosed. The former invisicap process is now known -- and it continues to run as it always did, but now users have a clear "safety" line.
Although 250 GB is nice and high, the bad thing is that it needs to increase 40-60% per year according to normal net growth. If it was 250 GB on October 1st, it ought to be about 275 GB now. This quickly can develop into a threat on our future -- a cap on progress.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
|
 DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1 | It should at least be hourly. Plus they should send an email when you get close to 240 G. In 3 Hours you could easily download a few gigs. | |
|
|
|
