From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 6 13:42:10 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED577385 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 13:42:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ipfw.ru (mail.ipfw.ru [IPv6:2a01:4f8:120:6141::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAC3A2254 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 13:42:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [2a02:6b8:0:401:222:4dff:fe50:cd2f] (helo=ptichko.yndx.net) by mail.ipfw.ru with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1WsqU9-0001of-5p; Fri, 06 Jun 2014 13:30:53 +0400 Message-ID: <5391C4BB.50106@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 17:40:11 +0400 From: "Alexander V. Chernikov" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Smith , bycn82 Subject: Re: [CFT]: ipfw named tables / different tabletypes References: <20140521204826.GA67124@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <537E1029.70007@FreeBSD.org> <20140522154740.GA76448@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <537E2153.1040005@FreeBSD.org> <20140522163812.GA77634@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <538B2FE5.6070407@FreeBSD.org> <539044E4.1020904@ipfw.ru> <000c01cf80be$41194370$c34bca50$@gmail.com> <20140605134256.GA81234@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <000001cf80cd$5dc1d9b0$19458d10$@gmail.com> <20140605155402.GA81905@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <000401cf80d8$ad1bb840$075328c0$@gmail.com> <20140606222753.W15833@sola.nimnet.asn.au> In-Reply-To: <20140606222753.W15833@sola.nimnet.asn.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: 'Luigi Rizzo' , 'FreeBSD Net' X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 13:42:11 -0000 On 06.06.2014 17:31, Ian Smith wrote: > On Fri, 6 Jun 2014 00:10:26 +0800, bycn82 wrote: Guys, I do understand that this is an important discussion about useful ipfw feature, but can you please stop invading this (totally unrelated) topic and return to original one? Thank you. > > Hi Bill, > > > Sorry for waste you time to explain it again, I will read the code first. > > Especially the code provided in free tutorials by your busy professor .. > > > And the latest patch of `PPS` should be OK, I checked the logic carefully this time. I sent it out last weekend. > > > > logic as below, PPS actually will be fulfilled using `PPT`,(N packets per M ticks). > > I think a few people have pointed out likely problems with 'packets per > tick(s)', and that people tend to prefer packets per second as a more > natural and familiar concept. I can see use cases for that, especially > when applied by easily updateable (and soon, saveable) tables. > > Remember that HZ may be set at boot time, and will at times by people > experimenting with, as one example, dummynet latency versus cpu use, so > rulesets specifying packets per tick would need also to be modified to > match, which won't happen. Packets per second is independent of HZ and > far easier to comprehend. See inetd(8) for a typical PPM example, while > PPS makes more sense for a firewall. > > I wonder if something like Bresenham's Linedrawing Algorithm might help? > > cheers, Ian >