Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 04 Jun 1999 17:46:56 -0700 | From | david <> | Subject | Re: zero-copy TCP fileserving |
| |
Alan Cox wrote:
> > Why do several prominent firewall and networking companies shun or speak foul of our > > networking, saying we drop so many packets under load that linux simply isn't an > > acceptable platform for their product? This is most recently in reference to > > You mean one single vendor whose monitoring product is optimised for BPF > and who hasnt considered writing a BPF module for Linux moans a lot.
yep, and the other bandwagon jumpers.
> Yeah SOCK_PACKET sucks in relative terms for high speed capture of packets. > As to firewalls/routing 2.2 is fast. If we can get fastroute caching firewall > rules in 2.3.x we'll really kick butt.
most excellent. i love driving the baddest OS on the block.
btw, is there a whitepaper or simile that weighs the merits of skbuff and mbuff against each other? i'd like to have artillery at hand to defend when assailed by bsd zealots.
thankyou, -d
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |