Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 21:28:55 +0300 From: Anton Alin-Adrian <aanton@reversedhell.net> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: how many IP aliases Message-ID: <40B63367.4070809@reversedhell.net> In-Reply-To: <60276.62.242.151.142.1085674259.squirrel@mailbox.wingercom.dk> References: <62559.62.242.151.142.1085671999.squirrel@mailbox.wingercom.dk> <60276.62.242.151.142.1085674259.squirrel@mailbox.wingercom.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Per Engelbrecht wrote: >>>There is no upper limit. > > > ok. > I > great. got that. >>>>do know that 128 addresses isn't a problem - depending of course >>>>on your setup such as ram, cpu, board and last but not least, >>>>nic. Don't do it on a $20 nomame-nic. >>> >>>It doesn't make any difference to the NIC. Well I understand it's just a linked list with aprox 128 nodes. That should be OK on decent RAM and CPU. > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but addresses to a interface is 'managed' > by SIOCAIFADDR and yes, that has noting to do with the nic itself. > They have nothing to do with NICs, they have to do with OS implementation. NICs talk on ethernet level, and I don't know any NIC's designed with special hardware for handling IP aliases. Intel's FXPs rule, because they even do CRC and QoS with microchip:). Probably his point was no-name hardware with small buffers may add to the latency. Thank you all so much! Best Wishes, -- Alin-Adrian Anton Reversed Hell Networks GPG keyID 0x1E2FFF2E (2963 0C11 1AF1 96F6 0030 6EE9 D323 639D 1E2F FF2E) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 1E2FFF2E
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40B63367.4070809>