From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 24 21:42:09 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73726106566B for ; Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:42:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik@cepheid.org) Received: from mail.cepheid.org (aleph.cepheid.org [72.232.60.94]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67B2F8FC22 for ; Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:42:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik@cepheid.org) Received: by mail.cepheid.org (Postfix, from userid 1006) id 062009B4011; Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:26:40 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:26:39 -0500 From: Erik Osterholm To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20080624212639.GA41755@aleph.cepheid.org> Mail-Followup-To: Erik Osterholm , freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Subject: Why isn't ALTQ in GENERIC? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:42:09 -0000 Hi all, Can anyone tell me if there are good reasons for explicitly leaving ALTQ out of the kernel? More specific to my circumstances, if I'm building kernels to be installed on every machine we deploy, is it worth building a separate kernel for ALTQ for those few boxes which will require it? Are there performance issues? Stability issues? Ultimately, I'm just surprised that it's not available in GENERIC if there isn't a good reason, but I can't find any documentation for that reason. If you can answer the same question for IPSEC, that would be nice, too! Erik