Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 17 Mar 2012 00:13:37 +0100
From:      Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>
To:        grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: netmap
Message-ID:  <20120316231337.GA62350@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
In-Reply-To: <CAD2Ti2-%2BRQZA8Tx6F746k%2Bz01yztZcKYUoptCYwFsp7odffExw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAD2Ti2-%2BRQZA8Tx6F746k%2Bz01yztZcKYUoptCYwFsp7odffExw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 06:48:48PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> Hi. I read most of the netmap paper. In short, cool work :)
> 
> I have one question... is this meant only for use with dedicated
> tap interfaces? Or will it be integrated with the mangement interface?
> 
> Example...
> 
> Today:
> fxp0 - onboard NIC, 192.168.0.10, ssh, httpd, smtp, tcpdump, etc.
> ixgbe0 - PCIe addon NIC, tap interface, netmap
> 
> Tomorrow:
> ixgbe0 - all the above functions in one NIC
> 
> It would seem to me that an 'emulate an interface' shim/driver
> could be written that would hook into netmap below and provide
> all the normal interface semantics above.

yes this is the long term plan (actually, kind of works now too
if the netmap-attached client then passes the packets to the
host stack).
The tricky question is who select which (incoming) traffic needs
to go to the host, and which one should be filtered out. I have
some ideas but need to figure out what is the best way to go.

> netmap interface <--> emulation driver <--> 'net0' interface
> 
> So example...
> 
> /etc/rc.conf:netmap_emulate1='ixgbe0 net0'
> /etc/rc.conf:netmap_emulate2='em0 net1'
> /etc/rc.conf:netmap_emulate3='fxp1 net2'
> /etc/rc.conf:ifconfig_net0='inet 10.0.0.3/24'
> ifconfig net0 192.168.0.10/24 -alias
> ifconfig net0 ::1
> tcpdump, httpd, sshd, ...
> ipfw, pf, netgraph, vlan, bridge, carp, ...
> and all the other various capabilities of a physical NIC, etc...
> 
> Also, though perhaps not needed for line rate capture, but for
> making a standard interface to them... will various 10/100/1000
> NICS such as fxp, em, de, bfe, etc... end up being netmap capable?

the em family is already supported. For the 100Mbit ports there
is really no point, as CPUs are fast enough already.

cheers
luigi

> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120316231337.GA62350>