Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 21 May 1999 11:06:01 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>
To:        Mark Tinguely <tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu>
Cc:        grog@lemis.com, brian@Awfulhak.org, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Number of TUN devices
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.95.990521105733.23621B-100000@current1.whistle.com>
In-Reply-To: <199905211328.IAA01990@plains.NoDak.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Fri, 21 May 1999, Mark Tinguely wrote:

> (discussion moved from -questions to -hackers; bits included)
> 
> >  On Thursday, 20 May 1999 at  9:13:12 -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> >  > FYI:
> >  >
> >  > I am playing with the idea of a direct-insert PPP for future SONET/ATM/DSL
> >  > PPP connections. here compression/ACCM are not a concern but higher data
> >  > rates make the kernel/user space copying (x2 once on each device inteface)
> >  > and the prcessing copying can be a concern for throughput. I am not bad
> >  > mouthing the tun driver; it is an excellent driver for serial devices that
> >  > needs to PROCESS the packets from/to the PPP link.
> >  >
> >  > In the SONET/ATM/DSL world, the PDUs will already be in mbufs from the
> >  > device driver. The MRU/MTU can be much larger. The data packets do not
> >  > need to compressed/encrypted/ACCM-ed, so the for those opened NCPs, the
> >  > data packets can be placed directly into the appropriate kernel protocol
> >  > stacks. the diagnostic, and control packets can still be processed in
> >  > user space via a protocol socket.
> >  >
> >  > Have you experimented what kind of through-put the NOS-TUN can handle?
> >  > I suspect that this model would be good enough for DSL speeds.
> >
> >  Why are you thinking of using user PPP for this?  As you say, at the
> >  data rates you're thinking of, it's not an optimal solution.

This is a 'natural' for the netgraph code we use for the Interjet.
(available from ftp://ftp.whistle.com/pub/archie/netgraph/index.html )
we use it together with the our mpd ppp daemon, and kernel based ppp
modules for all sorts of networking combinations.



> 
> no, only the LCP, NCP, authenication, dignostic messages for debugging
> is done in user space. this is small traffic to setup/maintain/tear down
> the connections, especially when you consider we are talking "PVC" in most
> cases. the network traffic will be either directly forwarded to the
> appropriate network stack, quietly discarded, or sent back to the originator
> depending on the state of the link/network protocol.
> 
> again, I am dealing with a situation where the packets do not have to
> be processed, unlike the serial PPPs. and on the downside, I lose the
> alias feature found in user PPP (which hopefully natd could fill in).
> 
> >  This is also probably material for -hackers.
> 
> moved.
> 
> --mark.
> 
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
> 



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.990521105733.23621B-100000>