From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 13 17:09:27 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C41FA6; Sat, 13 Oct 2012 17:09:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.allbsd.org (gatekeeper.allbsd.org [IPv6:2001:2f0:104:e001::32]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93B448FC0A; Sat, 13 Oct 2012 17:09:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alph.allbsd.org (p1137-ipbf1505funabasi.chiba.ocn.ne.jp [118.7.212.137]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.allbsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q9DH999p055687 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 14 Oct 2012 02:09:19 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by alph.allbsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q9DH977a048255; Sun, 14 Oct 2012 02:09:09 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 02:08:19 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20121014.020819.1069705220778418073.hrs@allbsd.org> To: melifaro@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6 and ICMP6 redirects - routing performance From: Hiroki Sato In-Reply-To: <5076C0E3.9050803@FreeBSD.org> References: <5076C0E3.9050803@FreeBSD.org> X-PGPkey-fingerprint: BDB3 443F A5DD B3D0 A530 FFD7 4F2C D3D8 2793 CF2D X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 23.4 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="--Security_Multipart(Sun_Oct_14_02_08_19_2012_155)--" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.4 at gatekeeper.allbsd.org X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mail.allbsd.org [133.31.130.32]); Sun, 14 Oct 2012 02:09:19 +0900 (JST) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-98.1 required=13.0 tests=CONTENT_TYPE_PRESENT, ONLY1HOPDIRECT,SAMEHELOBY2HOP,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on gatekeeper.allbsd.org Cc: net@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 17:09:27 -0000 ----Security_Multipart(Sun_Oct_14_02_08_19_2012_155)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Alexander V. Chernikov" wrote in <5076C0E3.9050803@FreeBSD.org>: me> Hello list! me> me> Currently there are some unnecessary code residing in me> netinet6/in6_rmx.c causing performance degradation for IPv6 me> forwarding. me> me> Initially it was merged from netinet/in_rmx.c but it seems it is me> totally unused now due to different approach used in IPv6 redirects. me> me> Code calls mtx_lock() on rte per each routing lookup in me> in6_matroute(). me> Initially I plan to make someting like r241406 for IPv6, but after me> some investigation I found that no one is currently setting me> RTF_DYNAMIC flag for IPv6 routes. me> me> the question is: can we remove this entirely (patch attached) or we me> still needs some parts of this due to incomplete RFC 4861 me> implementation? I think there is no problem with the removal because route handling by rtqkill() is not needed for routes injected by ND and removal of in6_clsroute() has already made the in6_rtqtimo() no-op. -- Hiroki ----Security_Multipart(Sun_Oct_14_02_08_19_2012_155)-- Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAlB5oAMACgkQTyzT2CeTzy1BUgCfdw2MVPNd4De/IfotSe6jZljy wDYAnRdBezUC24CQygVSBVij0BvxtDQq =AFyo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----Security_Multipart(Sun_Oct_14_02_08_19_2012_155)----