| To: | gleb@xxxxxxxxxxx (Gleb Natapov) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 2.4 kernel networking and SMP |
| From: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Date: | Sun, 11 Jun 2000 21:01:15 +0400 (MSK DST) |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <394388B0.54C15B24@nbase.co.il> from "Gleb Natapov" at Jun 11, 0 12:40:16 pm |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hello! > Two interfaces or physical devices? If I have many network interfaces > that use the same physical device What is "physical device"? 8) Assuming, you talk about tunnels: > to send packets do additional cpu will make sense? If encapsulation is expensive, sort of IPsec transform, smp will help a lot certainly. If it is not and you have thousand of tunnels, all of them will have single contention point at underlying interface certainly. Alexey |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Ben Greear |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Jes Sorensen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 2.4 kernel networking and SMP, Gleb Natapov |
| Next by Thread: | RE: 2.4 kernel networking and SMP, jacob avraham |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |