Ask Slashdot: How To Monitor Your Own Bandwidth Usage?

Vrtigo1 writes "With many ISPs either already using bandwidth caps or talking about them, I was wondering how other Slashdot readers are keeping tabs on how much data is being transferred through their home Internet connections. None of the consumer routers I've used seem to make this information easily accessible. I'd like some way to see exactly how much data has been sent and received by the WAN port facing my ISP's modem so I can compare the numbers I get with the numbers they give me. I don't want to pay for their modem firmware updates and other network management traffic, so I'd like to see how the two numbers line up."

Comments

again?

[demonbug]

Tomato.

DD-WRT.

Re:again?

[capnkr]

Either of those, and a Linksys WRT54GL router, dirt simple to set up. More info here.

Re:again?

[Khyber]

I have four WRT54GL routers running DD-wrt.

Not a damned one of them can remain stable and online for more than an hour, except when configured as a simple wireless bridge device.

Just install network traffic loggers on each machine. Do some simple math at the end of the month.

Re:again?

[capnkr]

That's a far different experience from what I have seen when using this combo. Without knowing more specifics, your issues could be the result of a number of different reasons: build version, incorrect installation process, overclocking, environment, etc... A search to determine what exactly is causing your issue(s) might help you figure out how to fix them - I don't think your experience is typical or common even. Good luck.

Tomato

[Krellion]

I use Tomato firmware on a WRT54G v2 router. It has many ways of viewing used bandwidth.

Netgear N600

[jayhawk88]

If you're not comfortable/willing to install a custom firmware, the Netgear N600 has a meter built in.

Your cap starts today.

[custerfluck]

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/03/14/1444213/ATampT-To-Introduce-Broadband-Caps

Re:Why would you think the numbers would match up?

[Archangel Michael]

If that is the case, (and I would assume the asshats would do this) then they are opening up themselves to a huge lawsuit. If you're going to measure "bandwidth" and put limits based on usage in terms of bytes (giga/tera) then you best be measuring bytes, and not the packets * MTU, which is a gross over simplification of the measure. There is no way that packets * MTU can be said to equate to anything in "bytes" except for pointy headed managers.

There are too many programs using low level states that need keep alive packets going, that don't measure in MTU size units. MTU is ~1400 bytes, and ping uses 32 bytes ... yeah that will work.