From owner-cvs-all Mon Feb 19 23: 0:13 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (flutter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DC6F37B65D; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 22:59:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1K6xpx89836; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:59:52 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Luigi Rizzo Cc: archie@dellroad.org (Archie Cobbs), joe@tao.org.uk, wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet ip_fw.c ip_fw.h src/sbin/ipfw ipfw.8 ipfw.c In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 19 Feb 2001 17:56:10 PST." <200102200156.f1K1uQS42063@iguana.aciri.org> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:59:51 +0100 Message-ID: <89834.982652391@critter> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <200102200156.f1K1uQS42063@iguana.aciri.org>, Luigi Rizzo writes: >> > How much work is this? What does it buy us performance-wise? >> >> It would be somewhat slower because of the extreme modularity. >> But it would be more flexible, and possibly more robust and >> maintainable. Unfortunately it would also be a good deal of work. >> It would be a good exercise in networking programming though.. :-) > >... and maybe with a chance of improving existing code in the process. >As someone said, you don't get things for free, but... SMPng will cost os more network performance than a NGification would. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message