Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 15:55:50 -0400 From: Avinash Lakhiani <alakhian@tcptrace.org> Subject: Re: tcptrace Feature Request Message-ID: <20020916155550.A13259@irg.cs.ohiou.edu>
Kevin,
I tried a small experiment with the long data hand-crafted for excel and it
did indeed accept the data pretty well. I used commas to separate the data
with the first field being the field name and the second and third fields
being for a->b and b->a. Please take a look at the attached file out.txt to
see if you think it would be nice to have the data that way.
Thank you!
--Avinash.
On Mon, Sep 16, 2002 at 01:34:14PM -0400, Kevin wrote:
> In truth I can live with either. Given the choice, the 2nd option is
> what I am building my current awk/sed script to. It just seems simpler
> to hand off pairs of data to be counted. I also suggest the
> source/dest (a/b) as the 1st field of the line.
>
> Thanks for the chance to have input!
> Kevin Mason
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: alakhian@masaka.cs.ohiou.edu
> > [mailto:alakhian@masaka.cs.ohiou.edu]
> > Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 13:28
> > To: Kevin
> > Cc: tcptrace@tcptrace.org
> > Subject: Re: tcptrace Feature Request
> >
> >
> > Kevin,
> >
> > We discussed about your feature request and believe that it
> > would indeed be a good idea, and very flexible too as Mark
> > said. The changes to output.c would be very trivial and we
> > could add a --csv option. The question remains as to what
> > would be the best representation of the data fields so as to
> > make this option really useful. I gave this some thought but
> > I believe that since you and many other would be the ones to
> > actually use this feature, it would be better to get some
> > feedback first.
> >
> > Since you would want to use this data for some sort of
> > further processing, obviously the text would not be very
> > useful. So, would it be useful to output all the data in the
> > same order (as the long output) separated by commas with a->b
> > first followed by b->a. Or should the data be sorted based on
> > fields such as:
> >
> > total packets: 52 total packets: 38
> > ack pkts sent: 51 ack pkts sent: 38
> >
> > to look like 52,38,51,38
> >
> > where the data is ordered as total_packets_ab,
> > total_packets_ba, ack_pkts_sent_ab, ack_pkts_sent_ba ...
> >
> > Comments/Suggestions?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > --Avinash
> > (tcptrace-maintainer)
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 11:36:43AM -0400, Kevin wrote:
> > > My apologies if this is being sent to the wrong list.
> > >
> > > When using tcptrace -l a lot of very useful information is output.
> > > When there are lots of sessions (>20) the output format is
> > cumbersome
> > > to compare the various sessions.
> > >
> > > Would it be possible to have to have an option to output in CSV
> > > format? That way the data can be sorted and sifted to
> > compare various
> > > errors or performance values.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Kevin Mason
> >
> > --
> > Avinash Lakhiani (http://www.tcptrace.org/~alakhian)
> > --
> >
> > ---
> > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.386 / Virus Database: 218 - Release Date: 9/9/2002
> >
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, send a message with body containing "unsubscribe tcptrace" to
> majordomo@tcptrace.org.
-- Avinash Lakhiani (http://www.tcptrace.org/~alakhian) --
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send a message with body containing "unsubscribe tcptrace" to majordomo@tcptrace.org.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 09/17/02 EDT