[mrtg] Bandwidth per user session - VPN 3000 & ASA

[Martin77]

Thanks for the reply Steve.
I set absmax to 100x bigger, but looks like the numbers on the graph don't
actually go any higher.
I'll attach the images of what it looks like for the bandwidth per user &
actual interface graphs.
Number of user sessions is always around 800-1000.

http://n2.nabble.com/file/n4188898/bw_per_user.png 
http://n2.nabble.com/file/n4188898/bw_out.png 

Any ideas?

Cheers,
-M.


S Shipway wrote:
> 
> If you're getting a graph that jumps between maxbytes and zero, then
> possibly the value being retrieved/calculated is >maxbytes and so is not
> being recorded.  To test this, set AbsMax[] to something much bigger (eg
> 10xMaxbytes) and see if the line appears.  Of course this doesnt explain
> why it is so big,..
> 
> Steve
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: mrtg-bounces at lists.oetiker.ch [mrtg-bounces at lists.oetiker.ch] On
> Behalf Of Martin77 [mrtg at mg77.net]
> Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2009 1:35 p.m.
> To: mrtg at lists.oetiker.ch
> Subject: [mrtg]  Bandwidth per user session - VPN 3000 & ASA
> 
> MRTG Guru's,
> 
> I've been looking at the conf files too long and can't figure out why this
> works on one device, but not the other.
> 
> Trying to graph bandwidth utilization of a single user session connected
> to
> a VPN gateway. Don't care about any particular users or top users or
> anything, just a simple 'current interface utilization / current number
> users = bandwidth per user' type expression.
> 
> Running MRTG 2.16.2.
> 
> These conf snippets running against a VPN 3000 work perfectly:
> Target[brm-vpn-srh-1.bw_in]: 1:public at brm-vpn-srh-1:
> Target[brm-vpn-srh-1.bw_out]: 2:public at brm-vpn-srh-1:
> Target[brm-vpn-srh-1.bw_per_user]: 1:public at brm-vpn-srh-1 /
> .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.171.1.3.1.1.0&.1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.
> 171.1.3.1.1.0:public at brm-vpn-srh-1
> 
> MaxBytes[brm-vpn-srh-1.bw_per_user]: 12500000
> Options[brm-vpn-srh-1.bw_per_user]: bits
> 
> Graph pattern follows i/f utilization graph, with numbers scaled down to
> appropriate value based on how many people logged in at that time.
> 
> On an ASA, I have these conf snippets:
> Target[sca-vpn-srh-1.counts]:
> .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.392.1.3.1.0&.1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.392.1.3.1.0:public at sca-vpn-srh-1
> -mgmt
> Target[sca-vpn-srh-1.bw_in]: #inside:public at sca-vpn-srh-1-mgmt:::::2
> Target[sca-vpn-srh-1.bw_out]: #outside:public at sca-vpn-srh-1-mgmt:::::2
> Target[sca-vpn-srh-1.bw_per_user]:
> #outside:public at sca-vpn-srh-1-mgmt:::::2
> / .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.392.1.3.1.0&.
> 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.392.1.3.1.0:public at sca-vpn-srh-1-mgmt:::::2
> 
> MaxBytes[sca-vpn-srh-1.bw_per_user]: 125000000
> Options[sca-vpn-srh-1.bw_per_user]: bits
> 
> The result here is that the graph jumps up and down between almost
> nothing,
> and
> the 125M max set in MaxBytes.
> 
> I think what it's doing in the 2nd case is dividing the actual value of
> the
> byte counter by user count.
> Using indexes & version 1 like on the 3k makes no difference.
> 
> Can anyone see what I'm doing wrong to get different expression eval
> behavior between these 2?
> Any way to make it use the utilization of an interface in the expression,
> instead of the raw counter value?
> 
> Thanks & Regards,
> -Martin.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://n2.nabble.com/Bandwidth-per-user-session-VPN-3000-ASA-tp4178963p4178963.html
> Sent from the MRTG Users Mailinglist mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mrtg mailing list
> mrtg at lists.oetiker.ch
> https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/mrtg
> _______________________________________________
> mrtg mailing list
> mrtg at lists.oetiker.ch
> https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/mrtg
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Bandwidth-per-user-session-VPN-3000-ASA-tp4178963p4188898.html
Sent from the MRTG Users Mailinglist mailing list archive at Nabble.com.