From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 11 18:56:40 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F8791065670 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:56:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ottk@zzz.ee) Received: from kalah.zzz.ee (kalah.zzz.ee [194.204.30.253]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19D4B8FC17 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:56:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kalah.zzz.ee (localhost.zzz.ee [127.0.0.1]) by kalah.zzz.ee (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0A55FD158 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:56:38 +0200 (EET) Received: by kalah.zzz.ee (Postfix, from userid 3019) id DF2B9FD14F; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:56:38 +0200 (EET) X-Spam-Checker-URL: http://info.zzz.ee X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin on spamassassin.zzz.ee X-Spam-Guessed-Language: X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.5 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_05 Received: from [192.168.1.64] (87-119-181-26.tll.elisa.ee [87.119.181.26]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by kalah.zzz.ee (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E73EBFD145 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:56:36 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <4F0DDB79.2010907@zzz.ee> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:56:57 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ott_K=F6stner?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20120111112400.Horde.g4QFfgcXel9PDXFQSwJwfrA@webmail.geofront.co.uk> <4F0D7B87.9060808@zzz.ee> <4F0DA344.9030504@infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4F0DA344.9030504@infracaninophile.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP @zzz.ee Subject: Re: Network throughput X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:56:40 -0000 On 11.01.2012 16:57, Matthew Seaman wrote: > Yes -- mrtg is nice, but it relies on the snmp interface counters, and > in this case with Gb traffic levels a 32bit counter will wrap in a few > minutes. mrtg samples the interface counter every 5 minutes IIRC, so > would probably be confused by that wrap-around happening at around the > same frequency. Unless you switch to using 64bit interface counters, > but I don't know if mrtg can cope with integer types that wide... > Cheers, Matthew Yes, I have seen that wrapping with few hundred megabit port traffic. New snmp port has 64 bit counter option. Personally, I have already built a new snmp with 64 bit counter option, but not yet tested if it works. Maybe somebody here can comment? regards, Ot