| To: | Jamal Hadi <hadi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Route cache performance under stress |
| From: | Ralph Doncaster <ralph@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 10 Jun 2003 09:18:37 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20030610072444.Q37105@shell.cyberus.ca> |
| References: | <008001c32eda$56760830$4a00000a@badass> <20030609195652.E35696@shell.cyberus.ca> <Pine.LNX.4.51.0306092006420.12038@ns.istop.com> <20030609204257.L35799@shell.cyberus.ca> <Pine.LNX.4.51.0306092200150.28167@ns.istop.com> <20030610043453.GC23009@netnation.com> <20030610072444.Q37105@shell.cyberus.ca> |
| Reply-to: | ralph+d@xxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Jamal Hadi wrote: > As a side note, note that stateless forwarding like BSD patricie tries > is no longer sufficient. Its no longer just looking up a nexthop, dec ttl, > recompute csum that we are optimizing for. It would certainly be sufficient for core routing. If I can have flow manipulation at no extra cost, I'll take it. If it's going to double the horsepower requirements, I don't want it. -Ralph |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Robert Olsson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Route cache performance under stress, Ralph Doncaster |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Jamal Hadi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |