From nobody Fri Nov 24 23:33:15 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-net@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ScWWM0sz0z51JDr for ; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 23:33:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jim@netgate.com) Received: from mail-lj1-x22d.google.com (mail-lj1-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ScWWL6P8hz3Hbg for ; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 23:33:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jim@netgate.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by mail-lj1-x22d.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2c59a4dd14cso27319111fa.2 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:33:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netgate.com; s=google; t=1700868797; x=1701473597; darn=freebsd.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=CSCQedku8QgDKA1LmIxTZWdLUsuXGsENbYPdwgWU9rU=; b=iTYHoVGU6maHzwrV803loEzs767KDCpfj0LzIjA69z/UqOzctlj02yL+CshRIDwXUt gDVeJb4nSIAMENmSDZOfvtHTY+TiRRvsM/wTXcBkBFnSH05mAg/Bnu5+hnur2856otin r5JHI4mXbKfs04P8WWHyV9bF8J21mFUdVaHZE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1700868797; x=1701473597; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=CSCQedku8QgDKA1LmIxTZWdLUsuXGsENbYPdwgWU9rU=; b=aoilhCrI/eq38MJx9i17795lIJx54Noa2HhWgdGQx6vi7ri3jj95gqFFyl6ch7MpiP VUpR65fblOaC6tI/UBejsjDRVID5HlHXrh4Y0I4voYjlFX98KUChSlrzBY9YBsBz/tJS fwiT84j2oyLRIjVEtm2MNs/mPhzSFeETAWruHDEiN/I4N3VdBVoy9MgtBWo/lDvPmyNP IN1/+0+P8l8rw82ibsdfgeB6+6Uv9wT1X91ocdhQafc9kjupO7djU1WJPExwbL4pFyOg WwuBI/k7zNcI1pax0wkW/AbJLtE5c43dCBWesVSCCQih0u40wVFaQfksiBaZ0cXLRHIq GUmA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyiPPa2vUZyA7EZtYOSAgqenOelHL0O4wjtPg5xqqWoJrQI6yqc S2fjryVvtcFYNrjOnbpBxTQpWgwQDB1/+w+B+RSxydYypL8rOGlI1tE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHjG1bSs1pJS/bcLU3vJrO6RvSMXjsnWPHZhlg/IbSJiGlxqt79+r2F6MV6Jx26+TDxSvRHxEWcWw2Nqx/V3aQ= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:94c7:0:b0:2c5:2661:ca06 with SMTP id r7-20020a2e94c7000000b002c52661ca06mr3115716ljh.46.1700868796553; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:33:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from 1064022179695 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:33:15 -0800 Received: from 1064022179695 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:33:12 -0800 List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mimestream 1.1.5) References: In-Reply-To: From: Jim Thompson Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:33:15 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: netgraph and vpp To: Benoit Chesneau Cc: "freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006db63f060aee6007" X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4ScWWL6P8hz3Hbg --0000000000006db63f060aee6007 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Nov 24, 2023 at 12:48:07=E2=80=AFAM, Benoit Chesneau wrote: > netgraph and vpp looks similar in their intent. Both are graphs to > process packets. > > I thought that usinv netgraph sounds interresting to build a modern > router or cpe. What about the perforance? Did anyone compRe? Also is ther= e > any difference in term of implementation of the processing? Id there any > recent paper about netgraph? > They are very, very different. Netgraph is closer to AT&T streams, but with mbufs. Netgraph would probably be better implemented these days as a set of netmap modules, ala https://github.com/zeek/packet-bricks or https://github.com/outscale/packetgraph (this one is DPDK, but similar architecture) --0000000000006db63f060aee6007 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Nov 24, 2023 at 12:48:07=E2=80= =AFAM, Benoit Chesneau <be= noitc@enki-multimedia.eu> wrote:
netgraph and vpp looks simi= lar in their intent.=C2=A0Both=C2=A0are graphs to process packets.=C2=A0=C2=A0

I thought that usinv=C2=A0 netgraph sounds interresting to build = a modern router or cpe.=C2=A0What about the perforance? Did anyone compRe? = Also is there any difference in term of implementation of the processing? I= d there any recent paper about netgraph?

They are very, very diffe= rent.=C2=A0 Netgraph is closer to AT&T streams, but with mbufs.

Netgraph would probably be better= implemented these days as a set of netmap modules, ala=C2=A0
https://git= hub.com/zeek/packet-bricks=C2=A0or=C2=A0https://github.c= om/outscale/packetgraph=C2=A0(this one is DPDK, but similar arch= itecture)



--0000000000006db63f060aee6007--