| To: | chas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Route cache performance under stress |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 10 Jun 2003 09:27:48 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | hadi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ralph+d@xxxxxxxxx, xerox@xxxxxxxxxx, sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <200306101142.h5ABgssG004210@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20030610061010.Y36963@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200306101142.h5ABgssG004210@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: chas williams <chas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 07:41:01 -0400 the bulk (by count) of the traffic seems to be in the 64-95 byte range. Ok, time to deploy ATM everywhere to replace our IP routers :) Sorry Chas, I couldn't resist... :) Reagardless, there are some sites on the net that publish things like BGP tables and traffic samples that people can use to do performance testing on new algorithms. I've read about it in papers by Vern Paxson (he used it to do his Bro thing) and others. I don't have a reference handy, anyone? I think it's called the IPMA project... |
| Previous by Date: | Re: 3c59x (was Route cache performance under stress), Jeff Garzik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, chas williams |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, chas williams |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |