From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 27 11:29:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F055F16A4CE for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 11:29:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.shock.ro (mail.shock.ro [212.93.151.164]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A14CD43D46 for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 11:29:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from aanton@reversedhell.net) Received: from localhost (localhost.ro [127.0.0.1]) by mail.shock.ro (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED2AF82 for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 21:27:12 +0300 (EEST) Received: from mail.shock.ro ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.shock.ro [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 65281-10 for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 21:27:12 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [10.0.0.2] (unknown [81.196.32.25]) by mail.shock.ro (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42E067E for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 21:27:12 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <40B63367.4070809@reversedhell.net> Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 21:28:55 +0300 From: Anton Alin-Adrian User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (X11/20040516) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <62559.62.242.151.142.1085671999.squirrel@mailbox.wingercom.dk> <60276.62.242.151.142.1085674259.squirrel@mailbox.wingercom.dk> In-Reply-To: <60276.62.242.151.142.1085674259.squirrel@mailbox.wingercom.dk> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.84.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at shock.ro Subject: Re: how many IP aliases X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 18:29:20 -0000 Per Engelbrecht wrote: >>>There is no upper limit. > > > ok. > I > great. got that. >>>>do know that 128 addresses isn't a problem - depending of course >>>>on your setup such as ram, cpu, board and last but not least, >>>>nic. Don't do it on a $20 nomame-nic. >>> >>>It doesn't make any difference to the NIC. Well I understand it's just a linked list with aprox 128 nodes. That should be OK on decent RAM and CPU. > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but addresses to a interface is 'managed' > by SIOCAIFADDR and yes, that has noting to do with the nic itself. > They have nothing to do with NICs, they have to do with OS implementation. NICs talk on ethernet level, and I don't know any NIC's designed with special hardware for handling IP aliases. Intel's FXPs rule, because they even do CRC and QoS with microchip:). Probably his point was no-name hardware with small buffers may add to the latency. Thank you all so much! Best Wishes, -- Alin-Adrian Anton Reversed Hell Networks GPG keyID 0x1E2FFF2E (2963 0C11 1AF1 96F6 0030 6EE9 D323 639D 1E2F FF2E) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 1E2FFF2E