|
backbone
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: October 18, 2006, 10:26:47 am » |
|
So we are a go?
If the nics are supported so yes  but can this system get info for 1.jan to 2.feb ? I see that it has info for an Interval, but I need to know how many GB traffic it use last mnd and so on.... Maybe the sensor system has what i need? It is the sensor system u want to make then? as a pfsense package? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
backbone
|
|
« Reply #16 on: October 22, 2006, 09:21:37 am » |
|
So we are a go?
So what do u say? Something that could be done? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
sullrich
|
|
« Reply #17 on: October 24, 2006, 03:15:11 pm » |
|
Yeah, I'll start on it in the next day or so. However, I am not sure your nics work or not, honestly. Thats why i was asking you all ..
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
narf
|
|
« Reply #18 on: October 25, 2006, 07:48:11 am » |
|
Is there a list of drivers that have been patched to work with promisc + VLAN, or is the bge module the only one that has been fixed?
I'm just curious as i should be doing some hardware shopping, and its alot easier to just buy hardware that works, instead of waiting for drivers to be fixed.
//Richard.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
sullrich
|
|
« Reply #19 on: October 26, 2006, 10:58:02 am » |
|
I would say it is the opposite and that most nics should work fine.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mercredi
|
|
« Reply #20 on: November 15, 2006, 05:27:07 am » |
|
and any updated information?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
sullrich
|
|
« Reply #21 on: November 15, 2006, 10:59:45 am » |
|
Doubtful. This thread went from promising to dead in the matter of a few days. What was almost 2K is now 250$ .. If I was Bill (which I am not) then I would be less than interested at this point for the amount of work that this entails.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
billm
|
|
« Reply #22 on: November 16, 2006, 07:03:26 pm » |
|
Doubtful. This thread went from promising to dead in the matter of a few days. What was almost 2K is now 250$ .. If I was Bill (which I am not) then I would be less than interested at this point for the amount of work that this entails.
Wrong thread But this did go kind of dead all the same  --Bill |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
sullrich
|
|
« Reply #23 on: November 16, 2006, 07:49:24 pm » |
|
Doubtful. This thread went from promising to dead in the matter of a few days. What was almost 2K is now 250$ .. If I was Bill (which I am not) then I would be less than interested at this point for the amount of work that this entails.
Wrong thread But this did go kind of dead all the same --Bill Second time this has happened to me. Woops |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
narf
|
|
« Reply #24 on: November 21, 2006, 04:37:30 am » |
|
Wrong thread But this did go kind of dead all the same --Bill I was wondering why it went dead? I think we established that this would work with most NICs. I'd appreciate this functionality in pfsense. That way we'd have all the information in one logical place, instead of deploying multiply small appliances. I'd be willing to donate some cash to this effort as well... provided its still considered a possibility... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
mrks
|
|
« Reply #25 on: November 21, 2006, 11:40:18 am » |
|
i've used ipfm before for this: http://robert.cheramy.net/ipfm/freebsd port: /usr/ports/net-mgmt/ipfm i'm just starting to play with pfsense and i think developers can do this better than me. maybe later on i can help with developing new packages. Regards |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mercredi
|
|
« Reply #26 on: November 25, 2006, 01:49:44 am » |
|
i like this solution, this is what we want. it would be best if someone can do a package from ipfm.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
sullrich
|
|
« Reply #27 on: November 25, 2006, 02:35:33 am » |
|
Alright, everyone else that pledged money in this thread agree? I will seriously do this one. It looks pretty helpful.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
narf
|
|
« Reply #28 on: November 26, 2006, 09:51:18 pm » |
|
Im not going to pretend to know anything about this, but can't the already built-in RRDtool graping functionality be tailored to do this for us?' I mean a nice page that showes us the bandwidth statistics in text of each host on the network - and maybe checkboxes next to those hosts to create a nice RRD graph to see who (or in our case, what) is hogging the bandwidth over any given time frame. Maybe even functionality to define groups of hosts (read departments) for graphing for an easy overview of whats going on. Regarding the pledges, I cannot speak for the others, but, given as this would be a valuable feature, I'd be willing to pledge $50 to this cause (cash is tight right now  ) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
sullrich
|
|
« Reply #29 on: November 26, 2006, 10:12:03 pm » |
|
Im not going to pretend to know anything about this, but can't the already built-in RRDtool graping functionality be tailored to do this for us?' I mean a nice page that showes us the bandwidth statistics in text of each host on the network - and maybe checkboxes next to those hosts to create a nice RRD graph to see who (or in our case, what) is hogging the bandwidth over any given time frame. Maybe even functionality to define groups of hosts (read departments) for graphing for an easy overview of whats going on. Regarding the pledges, I cannot speak for the others, but, given as this would be a valuable feature, I'd be willing to pledge $50 to this cause (cash is tight right now ) Hrm. This makes me think. PFTOP + RRD would do something similar to this... Scott |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
pfSense Forum
