From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 14 04:22:28 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 937B816A4CE; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:22:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from exchange.wan.no (exchange.wan.no [80.86.128.88]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1818F43D58; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:22:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sten.daniel.sorsdal@wan.no) Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:22:25 +0100 Message-ID: <0AF1BBDF1218F14E9B4CCE414744E70F5D9760@exchange.wanglobal.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Handling 100.000 packets/sec or more Thread-Index: AcPahSBHNMo/2HaLTPyBNdTZObH/kgAErKUg From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sten_Daniel_S=F8rsdal?= To: "Adrian Penisoara" , cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Handling 100.000 packets/sec or more X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Internet Services Providers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:22:28 -0000 >=20 > What can I do to make the system better handle this kind of=20 > traffic ? > Could device polling(8) or just increasing the kernel=20 > frequency clock to 1000Hz or more improve the situation ? > What kind of network cards could face a lot better this=20 > burden ? Are there any other solutions ? >=20 device polling(8) really does help _alot_ for packet floods/storms. for device polling to work properly (imho) you would need to set HZ to = 1000. I dont recommend any higher HZ on a PIII. I recommend Intel cards (fxp or em) because they chew through packets at = the highest rate (in our tests) given good supporting hardware and tuned = software. Both support device polling.