Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 23:31:09 +0900 From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@iijlab.net> To: Yu-Shun Wang <yushunwa@isi.edu> Cc: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IPComp question Message-ID: <20010202143109.61C0F7E2A@starfruit.itojun.org> In-Reply-To: yushunwa's message of Fri, 02 Feb 2001 00:20:30 PST. <Pine.BSF.4.31.0102020009250.931-100000@amc.isi.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> What you pointed out below is true. But I am more > interested in the relative performance since the number > I measured were under exactly the same setup and traffic > condition. I am just curious why IPComp was _relatively_ > (and signigicantly) slower than most of the encryption > algorithm. So I guess bandwidth is probably not the best > pointer since what I end up comparing was really the > implementations of different encryption/compression > algorithms which are CPU-bound in this case. did you try running these benchmarks on loopback interface? (i.e. sender and receiver on the same node) itojun To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010202143109.61C0F7E2A>