I'm seeing some discrepancy between our switch traffic logs and our Icecast logs in terms of total amount of data transferred. Our Icecast logs seem to be on the low side. I was wondering how reliable the logging mechanism is in other people's experiences... We're running Icecast 1.3.0 (we can't upgrade because 1.3.10 stutters and dies like crazy on RH6) and Ices. Any info that anyone has would be very helpful. Hunter --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
> I'm seeing some discrepancy between our switch traffic logs and our Icecast > logs in terms of total amount of data transferred. Our Icecast logs seem to > be on the low side.Icecast does som trivial accounting on the traffic sent and received. This is the application data as reported by send() and recv(), which is only one of the parts in the network traffic. On the other hand, it's the only part an application can display without some serious magic like dealing with pcap or something. The other parts are: * tcp headers * ip headers * tcp and ip resends * ethernet collisions * ethernet header To get a _really_ good view on bandwidth-usage on a network, you need a good tool like PacketLogic. :) It'll cost you though :) //Eel --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
Icecast is not going to log the TCP packet overhead, or your ethernet frame overhead, or resends, or collision. A switch would log all of that. It if it's less than a 15% discrepancy, you probably are just seeing packet overhead. jack. On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 09:10:42AM -0700, Hunter Hillegas wrote:> I'm seeing some discrepancy between our switch traffic logs and our Icecast > logs in terms of total amount of data transferred. Our Icecast logs seem to > be on the low side. > > I was wondering how reliable the logging mechanism is in other people's > experiences... > > We're running Icecast 1.3.0 (we can't upgrade because 1.3.10 stutters and > dies like crazy on RH6) and Ices. > > Any info that anyone has would be very helpful.--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
We're seeing a significant discrepancy between our internal logs and what MRTG is saying our box is pumping out... Arghhhhh... Hunter> From: Jack Moffitt <jack@xiph.org> > Reply-To: icecast@xiph.org > Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 08:22:56 -0600 > To: icecast@xiph.org > Subject: Re: [icecast] Icecast Logging - Accurate? > > It if it's less than a 15% discrepancy, you probably are just seeing > packet overhead.--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.