Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:38:23 -0600 From: Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com> To: Steve Francis <steve@expertcity.com> Cc: Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@withagen.nl> Subject: Re: Old SUN NFS performance papers. Message-ID: <400C403F.5000309@centtech.com> In-Reply-To: <400C3D24.3080503@expertcity.com> References: <003c01c3de8d$d569edb0$471b3dd4@dual> <400BE749.2030009@centtech.com> <400C039B.6080403@expertcity.com> <400C0707.7050805@centtech.com> <400C3D24.3080503@expertcity.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Steve Francis wrote: > Eric Anderson wrote: > >> >> I wasn't even sure where to start or stop snipping on this mail, >> since it is all good stuff - so I didn't. :) Thanks for the great >> info, and good explanations.. NFS+TCP is very nice, but I do believe >> the UDP transport was faster on a handful of tests (however I >> typically force use of TCP when I can).. >> >> One question - what does net.inet.ip.check_interface=0 do? > > > > makes FreeBSD not care if the interface a response comes in on is the > same as the one a request did. Helps only if network topology is funky. That's handy for a network like I have. What would also be handy, is a sysctl like that for the client side - that tells FreeBSD to ignore the fact that a response is coming from a different IP than what it sent the request to. Yes, I know this is a security issue, and yes I understand the ramifications. Nevertheless, I need it - unless there is a way to tell redhat and solaris to always answer on the same interface the request came in on.. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Systems Administrator Centaur Technology All generalizations are false, including this one. ------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?400C403F.5000309>