Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*$diet\-$FIB\s+alternative\s+fib

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*$diet\-$FIB\s+alternative\s+fib_hlist\.c\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 18:10:20 +0200; fib_hlist is the smallest and simpliest routing algo we could think of it's just a sorted (h)list. routing (FIB lookup) performance. dst hash is not used. fib_hlist fib_hash test routing table size; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00159.html (33,133 bytes)
2. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 20:39:10 +0200; Great patch! I wanted to do something like this for a long time :/ It is a good solution for 99.999% of all users who never have more than a few routes. Random comments while reading the code: I woul; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00165.html (10,115 bytes)
3. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 22:10:31 +0200; When we find the break-even point we can a print warning at insertions above this point. A minor problem. Interesting. I'll guess this goes for all FIB variants. Needs some experimentation. Doable. s; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00169.html (9,792 bytes)
4. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: adi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 08:49:29 -0400; Great patch it is - but why do you say "99.999% of all users" feel they would love this? Clearly perfomance at the low routes area is not something that is a huge difference against standard fib. And; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00198.html (9,474 bytes)
5. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: een <ak@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 20:07:43 +0200; What I wanted to say is that 99.999% of all users dont need the cisco grade BGP4 capable standard FIB, it is a just wasted complexity and memory for them. Yes, and complexity. -Andi; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00215.html (8,730 bytes)
6. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: aber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 21:54:49 +0200; fib_hlist is the smallest and simpliest routing algo we could think of it's just a sorted (h)list. routing (FIB lookup) performance. dst hash is not used. fib_hlist fib_hash test routing table size -; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00228.html (9,447 bytes)
7. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 13:31:14 +0200; Yes I'll guess kernel config would be the first step. Also we need to find out if there are any useful options to current FIB. Which is very general purpose. Anyway we have a cleaner interface to FIB; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg00294.html (9,174 bytes)
8. (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 18:10:20 +0200; Hello! fib_hlist is the smallest and simpliest routing algo we could think of it's just a sorted (h)list. routing (FIB lookup) performance. dst hash is not used. fib_hlist fib_hash test routing table; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01448.html (33,132 bytes)
9. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 20:39:10 +0200; Great patch! I wanted to do something like this for a long time :/ It is a good solution for 99.999% of all users who never have more than a few routes. Random comments while reading the code: I woul; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01454.html (10,179 bytes)
10. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 22:10:31 +0200; When we find the break-even point we can a print warning at insertions above this point. A minor problem. Interesting. I'll guess this goes for all FIB variants. Needs some experimentation. Doable. s; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01458.html (9,868 bytes)
11. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 08:49:29 -0400; Great patch it is - but why do you say "99.999% of all users" feel they would love this? Clearly perfomance at the low routes area is not something that is a huge difference against standard fib. And; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01487.html (9,550 bytes)
12. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 20:07:43 +0200; What I wanted to say is that 99.999% of all users dont need the cisco grade BGP4 capable standard FIB, it is a just wasted complexity and memory for them. Yes, and complexity. -Andi; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01504.html (8,848 bytes)
13. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: Andre Tomt <andre@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 21:54:49 +0200; fib_hlist is the smallest and simpliest routing algo we could think of it's just a sorted (h)list. routing (FIB lookup) performance. dst hash is not used. fib_hlist fib_hash test routing table size -; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01517.html (9,622 bytes)
14. Re: (diet-)FIB alternative fib_hlist.c (score: 1): Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 13:31:14 +0200; Yes I'll guess kernel config would be the first step. Also we need to find out if there are any useful options to current FIB. Which is very general purpose. Anyway we have a cleaner interface to FIB; /archives/netdev/2005-05/msg01583.html (9,254 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]