Date: Sat, 28 May 2016 00:47:51 +0000 From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r300854 - in head/sys: netinet netinet6 Message-ID: <1EF6F385-D12B-4956-B501-8CB8BD414E7E@lists.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <20160528000259.GY58287@FreeBSD.org> References: <201605271731.u4RHV2oW071581@repo.freebsd.org> <CAJ-VmokZZM-akvT6ZH=MuFjA0RdqpRd3Vf79-ssRBpkKk5MLRw@mail.gmail.com> <20160528000259.GY58287@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 28 May 2016, at 00:02 , Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >=20 > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 02:27:45PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > A> Hm, doesnt this make sense to do as part of RO_RTFREE? >=20 > I agree that it looks messy, but for now we just need to fix = instapanic. >=20 > I will either return to this, or may be melifaro's new routing will > outperform FLOWTABLE and we can delete it. This statement makes no sense to me at this point anymore. For local connections you have cached routes; no lookup will be faster. For forwarding flowtable should not be used anyway. What you mean is that with L2 caching in the inPCB, flowtable will = become obsolete? /bz=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1EF6F385-D12B-4956-B501-8CB8BD414E7E>