Re: Re[2]: [sniffer] Sniffer Updates

[Tom Baker | Netsmith Inc]

Title: Re: Re[2]: [sniffer] Sniffer Updates

Automate harassment reminders to those of us not using it. :)

I think I'll go enable gzip tonight




-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Landry William <sniffer@SortMonster.com>
Sent: Mon Dec 27 12:36:06 2004
Subject: Re[2]: [sniffer] Sniffer Updates

On Monday, December 27, 2004, 12:46:19 PM, Landry wrote:


LW> Are folks taking advantage of the "wget" compression option before
LW> downloading their rulebase updates?  If the slow download speeds are a
LW> bandwidth saturation issue on the Sniffer end, this would certainly cut down
LW> on the bandwidth requirements on their end and increase the download times
LW> for everyone.

LW> Also, I've got to ask, if the downloads are happening "behind the scenes",
LW> by an automated or triggered download, why the concern about speeds, as long
LW> as your downloads are successful?

>From what I've seen in the logs, only about 5% of folks are taking
advantage of gzip right now.

Also, I did some incantations on the log (grep, awk, uniq etc) and
came up with just under half of our customers downloading their
rulebase between 1200 and 1300 today. That's between 2 and 3 times as
many as should have done it ;-) -- so the backlog is explainable.

This kind of thing happens for lots of reasons and there are a lot of
ways to mitigate the problem.

A big one on the list - certainly - is using the gzip capability. With
only 5% of folks using this and average compression ratios well above
50% there is plenty of room to "make a big dent" in this.

_M




This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and (un)subscription instructions go to http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html