From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 21 11:46:07 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BAA916A417 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:46:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@meijome.net) Received: from sigma.octantis.com.au (ns2.octantis.com.au [207.44.189.124]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328AF13C481 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:46:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@meijome.net) Received: (qmail 3593 invoked from network); 21 Sep 2007 06:46:06 -0500 Received: from 124-170-90-150.dyn.iinet.net.au (HELO localhost) (124.170.90.150) by sigma.octantis.com.au with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 21 Sep 2007 06:46:06 -0500 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 21:46:02 +1000 From: Norberto Meijome To: Richard A Steenbergen Message-ID: <20070921214602.38487d27@meijome.net> In-Reply-To: <20070921035449.GC1906@gerbil.cluepon.net> References: <46F1AC0B.9040109@ibctech.ca> <46F1BDE1.8090102@gmail.com> <46F1E900.7070604@elischer.org> <46F1F376.3020609@ibctech.ca> <20070920072409.GT79417@elvis.mu.org> <20070920114839.M37866@swaggi.com> <20070921035449.GC1906@gerbil.cluepon.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.1 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Quagga as border router X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:46:07 -0000 On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:54:49 -0400 Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > Honestly, FreeBSD routing code is pretty poor as far as a modern router > goes. If you throw enough CPU at it you can brute force your way through > plenty of things, but in the context of modern commercial routers it > doesn't even play in the same league (even for a software-only router). Interesting.... what is the golden aim of software based router we should be trying to reach? IMHO, comparing routing code in software vs. hardware routing, or vs a RTOS seems a bit useless (unless the comparison is something like 'we could do things much faster this way, but that would force us to go down the path of hard RT OS..) Which is different to saying 'well, this and that part of x and Y are inefficient / too expensive for the latest cpu models." I'm not bagging you , but there's always the balance to be had - something very flexible (as *BSD / Linux ) vs something very rigid (programmatically) but very fast / scalable... i'm interested in seeing how / whether we efficiency can be increased without losing the flexibility (of course, @ the cost of time,etc...something needs to give :D ) cheers, B _________________________ {Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome "He loves nature in spite of what it did to him." Forrest Tucker I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when wet. Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have been Warned.