On 02/26/2012 10:55 PM, Frank Cox wrote: > On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 15:50:32 -0600 > Les Mikesell wrote: > >> Most people would just look at the router's own bandwidth measurement >> or the one at the ISP's end if that is available. > > Possibly, but that wouldn't break it down by machine. And in that situation > I'd think a per-machine breakdown would be useful because then you'd know if > you should be yelling at the kid, the wife or the family dog when you get the > ten thousand dollar ISP bill. Again, it just seems like the sort of thing that > folks would want to be able to track in certain situations. But apparently > not. > >> I thought what made >> your case uncommon was that you had multiple machines and multiple >> routers and wanted the measurements for each pairing even though the >> packets go over the same interfaces with no inherent separation. > > The separation is the gateway assignment or the lack thereof (for local > traffic). But other than that, yep, that's a correct assessment. > >> If you added interfaces and subnets for each route you wanted to measure >> separately the normal tools would work naturally. > > Indeed, but that adds a whole new layer of complexity to my network that's not > really needed for any other purpose. > > Then use "tc" for bandwidth control ( per source IP ) with pipes much larger then your bandwidth, so you are not limiting, but get only reports of the usage per source (local) IP. -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe Google is the Mother, Google is the Father, and traceroute is your trusty Spiderman... StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant