Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Route\s+cache\s+performance\s+under\s+stress\s*$/: 364 ]

Total 364 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: chas williams <chas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 07:41:01 -0400
i was curious at one point and collected a some packet size stats on our border router. while the average packet size is close to 500, the bulk (by count) of the traffic seems to be in the 64-95 byte
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg01150.html (11,572 bytes)

2. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: "John S. Denker" <jsd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 07:58:33 -0400
Typical packet is around 500 bytes average. Not sure that's really the case. I have the impression the traffic is basically something like: - close to 1500 bytes (data transfers) - between 40-100 by
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg01151.html (11,679 bytes)

3. RE: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Ralph Doncaster <ralph@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:03:33 -0400 (EDT)
"real world" is the worst-case DOS tool available. Synflood tools like juno seem to fit that category. If you think juno is not a good real-world test, then keep pissing people off and you'll find ou
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg01159.html (15,202 bytes)

4. RE: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Ralph Doncaster <ralph@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:29:18 -0400 (EDT)
A script kiddie 0wning a box with a FE connection is nothing. During what was probably the worst DOS I got hit with, one of my upstream providers said they were seeing about 600mbps of traffic relate
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg01160.html (10,972 bytes)

5. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:41:09 +0200
First run... Worst senario 1 dst/pkt w. 64 byte pkts. 2*10 Million packets injected. eth0, eth2. Input rate 2*190 kpps clone_skb=1. Routing table of 123946 routes. UP. NAPI gives fairmess between bot
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg01157.html (12,129 bytes)

6. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 12:58:31 +0200
8896 rt_garbage_collect 9.4237 8959 ip_route_input_slow 3.8885 10516 dst_alloc 73.0278 10666 kmem_cache_free 66.6625 15339 tg3_rx 16.2489 16553 ipt_do_table 14.9937 20193 fn_hash_lookup 70.1146 26833
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00005.html (11,632 bytes)

7. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 08:18:52 -0700
... This reminds me of the situation we experienced with the dst cache overflowing in early 2.2 kernels. This was a long time ago, when our traffic was only about 10 Mbits/second. We had recently upg
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00006.html (11,468 bytes)

8. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 18:36:37 +0200
We are given more work than we have resources for (max_size) what else than refuse can we do? But yes we have invested pretty much work already. Also remember we are looking into runs were 100% of in
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00007.html (11,159 bytes)

9. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 11:05:37 -0700
Well, this is the problem. We do not and cannot know which entries we really want to remember (legitimate traffic). Adding code to actually refuse new dst entries is just going to make the DoS effect
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00010.html (10,861 bytes)

10. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Anderson <ryan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 13:39:49 +0200
hanges.
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00149.html (14,308 bytes)

11. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: vid S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 05:05:00 -0700 (PDT)
ecisely
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00150.html (10,266 bytes)

12. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: rian Weimer <fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 15:10:25 +0200
ubnets,
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00151.html (10,724 bytes)

13. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: n Weimer <fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 20:58:57 +0300 (EEST)
xxxxxx>
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00153.html (9,532 bytes)

14. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 16:49:26 -0700
1.1/19?
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00154.html (10,456 bytes)

15. RE: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: x>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 19:55:58 -0400
][ Net
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00155.html (12,681 bytes)

16. RE: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: Miyazawa <kazunori@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 23:15:46 -0400 (EDT)
to has
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00158.html (14,810 bytes)

17. RE: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author:
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 01:27:48 -0400
s. Jeff
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00160.html (16,926 bytes)

18. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: xxxx>
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 22:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
ition o
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00161.html (10,485 bytes)

19. Re: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author:
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 22:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
ouldn't
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00162.html (11,663 bytes)

20. RE: Route cache performance under stress (score: 1)
Author: S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 01:51:45 -0400
illions
/archives/netdev/2003-06/msg00163.html (12,246 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu