From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 20 19:55:54 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41DD61065676 for ; Sat, 20 Dec 2008 19:55:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [IPv6:2001:4070:101:2::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70E208FC14 for ; Sat, 20 Dec 2008 19:55:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id mBKJtgnp010063; Sat, 20 Dec 2008 20:55:42 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id mBKJtg0f010060; Sat, 20 Dec 2008 20:55:42 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 20:55:42 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Lowell Gilbert In-Reply-To: <44iqpezlb8.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> Message-ID: <20081220205414.A10042@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <1229788709.1583.16.camel@MGW_1> <44iqpezlb8.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: martes@mgwigglesworth.com, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Network Stack Code Re-write (Possible motivations...?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 19:55:54 -0000 > I very much doubt that marketing issues were a significant issue. > Off-the-shelf OS networking has always fallen short of supporting it wasn't made for that. > As someone else already mentioned in this thread, supporting hardware > offload for forwarding is a major issue. Core routers (or even > provider-edge routers) depend on most of the packet forwarding being > done in proprietary hardware. Operating system IP stacks don't support > this very well; all of the routers I've worked on used the kernel IP > stack only for packets going to and from the kernel itself, and used a > different stack for what I call "transit" packets -- those that are > only being forwarded by the local system. as higher speed routers are "hardware" - why OS has to do ANY work on routing? it's just there to prepare routing tables in format required for routing ASIC's and put them there!