Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 08:26:14 -0700 From: Jason R Thorpe <thorpej@zembu.com> To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@info.iet.unipi.it> Cc: Gunther Schadow <gunther@aurora.regenstrief.org>, Darren Reed <darrenr@reed.wattle.id.au>, snap-users@kame.net, julian@elischer.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, ipfilter@coombs.anu.edu.au, altq@csl.sony.co.jp Subject: Re: [altq 838] Re: The future of ALTQ, IPsec & IPFILTER playing together ... Message-ID: <20010503082614.A17582@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> In-Reply-To: <200105030750.JAA44246@info.iet.unipi.it>; from luigi@info.iet.unipi.it on Thu, May 03, 2001 at 09:50:25AM %2B0200 References: <3AF108F2.BA4AF637@aurora.regenstrief.org> <200105030750.JAA44246@info.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 09:50:25AM +0200, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> wrong. It is an interpreted bytecode, much slower than,
> say, approaches which translate individual filters into
> native machine code (DPT/DPF ? don't remember the exact reference,
> it was some usenix/sigcomm paper).
The fact that BPF does not currently synthesize into native instructions
is orthogonal to the BPF instruction set. On my long-term TODO list for
PACE (my packet classification engine) is a BPF -> CPU translator.
--
-- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@zembu.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010503082614.A17582>