nanog mailing list archives
Re: [nsp] Re: Per VLAN Stats on MSFC2 - Complaints from the Field
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <chris () UU NET>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:27:41 +0000 (GMT)
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Anthony Cennami wrote:
If you want to bill accurately, bill off the Layer 2 ports; that's what is always churning the traffic. I've not looked at the accuracy on a scientific level, but I've never found what I believed to be a serious discrepency when billing/polling the physical ports.
What about the cases where the customer has more than 1 port on your switch, you must then aggregate the traffic from N ports, discount the data between the local hosts and only bill for the actual up/down from the switch to the core, no? That seems complex, of course perhaps only 1 port per customer makes some sense in these cases too, eh?
Current thread:
- Re: [nsp] Re: Per VLAN Stats on MSFC2 - Complaints from the Field Anthony Cennami (Nov 20)
- Re: [nsp] Re: Per VLAN Stats on MSFC2 - Complaints from the Field Christopher L. Morrow (Nov 20)
- Re: [nsp] Re: Per VLAN Stats on MSFC2 - Complaints from the Field Anthony Cennami (Nov 20)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: [nsp] Re: Per VLAN Stats on MSFC2 - Complaints from the Field Stephen J. Wilcox (Nov 20)
- Re: [nsp] Re: Per VLAN Stats on MSFC2 - Complaints from the Field Christopher L. Morrow (Nov 20)