Ok what about previous question that i sent?<br><br>On Friday, May 22, 2015, Tom Laermans &lt;<a href="mailto:tom.laermans@powersource.cx">tom.laermans@powersource.cx</a>&gt; wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 05/22/2015 03:00 PM, Mark D. Nagel wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 5/22/2015 5:55 AM, Adam Armstrong wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
You can fetch the in/out/95th/etc data for each billing period from<br>
the database, or you can drag all of the measurements and work that<br>
stuff out yourself if you want a different billing style, and just use<br>
observium as a poller.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
Well, 95th for links in which the actual speed is known, correct?  We<br>
still have no general method to signal Observium about links with<br>
sub-port speeds, like 100Mbps ethernet ports connected to a 12/2 cable<br>
modem, right?  Or did I miss that in an update?<br>
</blockquote>
Port speed does not influence 95th percentile billing.<br>
<br>
Tom<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
observium mailing list<br>
<a>observium@observium.org</a><br>
<a href="http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium" target="_blank">http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium</a><br>
</blockquote>