[imc-st.louis] colo:accurate bandwith use stat
thomas at resist.ca
thomas at resist.ca
Sun Dec 19 16:08:02 PST 2004
Here is a little analysis of of the stlimc box bandwith usage since the
last reboot... about 2 day and 6 hours. The numbers are fairly accurate
but the sample period is obviously quite small.
In the last 2 and 6 hous the box has used an average of 76.626 Kbps
transmitting and recieving on its ethernet interface.
Kbps is the denomination that colo and hosting providers are going to want
Some of this will was local traffic in ARP, SNMP, or other local protocols
on the Acumen traffic, not bandwith we have to worry about...
But, this is a very negligible amount.
There are lots of tools that are available for getting this information in
more detail and more easily, but , for 6( or 10 maybe???) months, the c
libraries have been fucked up on the imc box and it has been impossible to
compile anything.... so i took 15 min and did this simple math myself.
t = 191743.82 (system ticks... seconds)
rx = 132429727 (bytes)
tx = 1704086778 (bytes)
rBps = rx / t (bytes/sec)
tBps = tx / t (bytes/sec)
bps = (tBps + rBps) x 8 (avg bits/sec)
kbps = bps /1000 (avg kilobits per second)
> OK, this one looks good (riseup/seaccp).
> Mostly its psychological having easy phyical access to the server, but
> youre right
> its not like we can go to acumen 24/7 currently (and the server always
> seems to go down
> on a friday afternoon....).
> So we need a rack-mountable server, right? I dont think our current one
> has rack ears... or does it?
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 03:51:21PM -0800 or so, thomas at resist.ca wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> I just got word back from Elijah at riseup about the riseup colo
>> collective.(see forward at bottom)
>> The STLIMC can have colo at cost in seattle in early Jan. I am going to
>> get a box in a rack out there regaurdless of what stlimc.org chooses to
>> do. I have several projects I would like to have a cheap fast box to
>> I filled out the app for stlimc.org, just in case you all decide to go
>> this route....
>> As far as having the box local, this has obvious advantages(easy to make
>> hardware changes yourself) but without paying top dollar the chances are
>> very slim that you are going to have the 24/7 access it takes to "beat
>> feds there on your bikes" and presented with the cold ediface of the
>> that is the FBI, exactly what hosting company is going to walk down the
>> street and give the stlimc a heads up? Acumen would not, I bet.
>> they pulled the plug on our box when it was hosting worldagforum.com
>> the first threat of DMCA litigation...
>> If you hosted in the riseup rack in seattle you might have something
>> strength in numbers... If the feds came knocking....lots of activists
>> their services, lots of projects are hosted on their boxes, lots of
>> college kids would get pissed and call the ACLU.
>> Just my 2 centimos...
>> ---------------------------- Original Message
>> Subject: Re: colo collective
>> From: "elijah" <elijah at riseup.net>
>> Date: Sat, December 18, 2004 10:15 am
>> To: thomas at resist.ca
>> thomas at resist.ca wrote:
>> > I just came across a post of yours to an IMC Tech list from June
>> describing a community colo project. Well today I found out that STLIMC
>> and all projects hosted on the stlimc box loose their free colo at then
>> end of January.
>> > Are their any more spaces in the seattle rack, if not any ideas for
>> cheap/free colo in the states?
>> we are just about to get an additional rack in early january. we are
>> giving preference to activist projects, including IMCs, so if you want
>> in, you are in.
>> answer the 'request colocation' questions at http://seaccp.org.
>> in solidarity,
>> Imc-stlouis mailing list
>> Imc-stlouis at lists.indymedia.org
> Imc-stlouis mailing list
> Imc-stlouis at lists.indymedia.org
More information about the Imc-stlouis