From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 30 18:27:48 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2FCB4DE for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 18:27:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.bsdinfo.com.br (mail.bsdinfo.com.br [67.212.89.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70AE1673 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 18:27:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.bsdinfo.com.br (mail.bsdinfo.com.br [127.0.0.1]) by mail.bsdinfo.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE571139CA for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 15:19:36 -0300 (BRT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bsdinfo.com.br; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type :in-reply-to:references:subject:subject:to:mime-version :user-agent:from:from:date:date:message-id; s=dkim; t= 1412101175; x=1412965176; bh=rQ2dcahoMtrMKfBS1PFvVJkdQxkZcs3RpUL pxkg4dOM=; b=fjZFbwkp66xOQBcnjf85n7PuV+XiODK9NMb8rHETvVdLabBHcgo HGlaF8AGh0edzYdzr4DINS0VHqLKAGq4ACmBXjihed0fzZiW9j6mIvX6dSGuP69m IU4o6JD340l9ZGa5aU9ry58FU8SJEQy8L3TC91VCOxsGOTiDCe+434z0= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.bsdinfo.com.br Received: from mail.bsdinfo.com.br ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.bsdinfo.com.br (mail.bsdinfo.com.br [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4nOvFdUR5LD5 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 15:19:35 -0300 (BRT) Received: from [192.168.88.15] (unknown [186.193.48.8]) by mail.bsdinfo.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7875C139C9 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 15:19:35 -0300 (BRT) Message-ID: <542AF42B.60206@bsdinfo.com.br> Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 15:19:23 -0300 From: Marcelo Gondim User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Will netmap-ipfw fwd? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 18:27:48 -0000 On 30/09/2014 13:49, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > Should work. > Please try the latest version from code.google.com/p/netmap-ipfw/ > > Cheers > Luigi Hi Luigi, The netmap-ipfw be included in the FreeBSD 10.1 final? Cheers, Gondim > > On Tuesday, September 30, 2014, Eduardo Meyer wrote: > >> I have a problem, where I need to fwd a high rate of pps, and I dont have >> enough CPU. It's around 900Kpps, so I would like to know if ipfw userland >> version with netmap support will do fwd? >> >> Here are my current rules: >> >> 00100 fwd 10.1.2.1 tag tcp from table(100) to any dst-port 80,1024-65535 in >> { via lagg0 or via vlan1010 } >> >> 00200 prob 0.500000 fwd 10.1.2.2 tcp from any 80,1024-65535 to table(100) >> in { via igb6 or via igb7 } >> 00300 fwd 10.1.2.3 tcp from any 80,1024-65535 to table(100) in { via igb6 >> or via igb7 } >> >> With those rules, my CPU interrupt rate raises from 30% to 80%. >> >> If netmap/ipfw has the ability to fwd should I expect a better interrupt >> rate and lower load? >> >> Sorry to ask before actually trying but this is a production environment >> and I don't have enough room to test, I would like to read opinions before >> finding out a nightly window to do the changes and tests. >> >> Thank you. >> >> -- >> =========== >> Eduardo Meyer >> pessoal: dudu.meyer@gmail.com >> profissional: ddm.farmaciap@saude.gov.br >> _______________________________________________