From owner-freebsd-net Tue Jul 11 8:55:52 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mail.Go2France.com (ms1.meiway.com [212.73.210.73]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A8AB37B637 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:55:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lconrad@Go2France.com) Received: from sv.Go2France.com [212.73.210.79] by mail.Go2France.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.03) id A37661D005C; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 17:55:34 +0200 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000711174522.03075a20@mail.Go2France.com> X-Sender: lconrad%Go2France.com@mail.Go2France.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 17:53:24 +0200 To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org From: Len Conrad Subject: Re: Merge of KAME code In-Reply-To: <200007111358.JAA64577@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >Functioning IPsec with IKE is going to become a necessity in the very near >future, and if we >desire to maintain our momentum it's necessary to support both in the >active release train. For the common situ of one-to-many tunneling, I hope that the "one" (server) gets some hardware-assist for IPsec encryption to keep up with the many tunnels. That couple with the many's running FBSD + IPsec would be a winner with industrial capacity. Has anybody benchmarked or simulated how many tunnels and bits/sec one software-only FreeBSD IPsec server can support? Len Len http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com: ISC BIND 8 installable binary for NT4 http://IMGate.MEIway.com: Build free, hi-perf, anti-spam mail gateways To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message