Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 09:36:14 -0700 From: Derrick MacPherson <dm@mainframe.ca> To: Peter Matulis <petermatulis@yahoo.ca> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: traffic accounting. Message-ID: <1126715774.12094.12.camel@Mandarin-04.mainframe.ca> In-Reply-To: <20050914031114.96483.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050914031114.96483.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 23:11 -0400, Peter Matulis wrote: > --- <norgaard@locolomo.org>Erik N=C3=B8rgaard wrote: >=20 > > Derrick MacPherson wrote: > > > I am going to pop a machine (bridged interfaces) in tween our LAN and > > > our firewall (pix) and am wanting to know what people would recommend > > > for IP accounting, it would be great to have a web based output to sh= ow > > > what traffic, from/to what hosts so the boss is happy to look at it. >=20 > Are you searching for something that looks good or something more factual= ? Probably more pretty than extremely accurate. I've actually mirrored a port on the switch that's to our internet connection, and have ntop monitoring that. Seems to be working fine, I guess I would like a bit more of a warm fuzzy feeling that what i'm doing is right. > Another question to consider is whether you are interested in bandwidth > (bytes/sec) or in actual bytes transferred. There are fewer tools that p= rovide > persistent & archivable stats for the latter and I have yet to find one t= hat > displays the latter in graphical form without it becoming a science proje= ct. bytes transfered is better, but both appreciated. And ya, it seems like there's a few solutions, none perfect. I am pushing for the replacement of our Pix's, my preference is PF on *BSD, but again, they want something that looks pretty.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1126715774.12094.12.camel>