Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 13:06:54 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ermal_Lu=E7i?= <eri@freebsd.org> To: Manoj Ganesan <manoj.ganesan@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-pf@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pf@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Reloading anchors with many streams Message-ID: <CAPBZQG0Zv0SCubM_TD06-cPoLxEa=b-rgvCnspUSXdpQ4g9p1A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAOtNLgLByv40PSmXsWeihckbgmaxZEEifoCDX3gmtE0pnTNVxQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAOtNLgLByv40PSmXsWeihckbgmaxZEEifoCDX3gmtE0pnTNVxQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Manoj Ganesan <manoj.ganesan@gmail.com>wrote: > Hey everyone, > > I'm just beginning to use FreeBSD + PF, for a use-case of multiple (1000s > of) UDP streams, each attached via an anchor. When I unload/flush one of > these anchors (say I tear down a stream), does it affect the other streams > enough to create jitter? In general, does reloading or manipulating an > anchor cause the other connections to be affected negatively? > > Well you will affect the streams since you have to grab the ruleset lock for it to add and remove rules. Anchors need to be setup as well during the same process so, yes, you will pause the other streams. > Also, design-wise is this an okay approach, where I have to > bring-up/tear-down streams on the fly, and I use anchors for the purpose? By design that's correct, though if you can control the way you add the rules you can just avoid the anchors and just add straight rules. > Thanks, > Manoj > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-pf@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pf > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-pf-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Ermal
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPBZQG0Zv0SCubM_TD06-cPoLxEa=b-rgvCnspUSXdpQ4g9p1A>