From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mon Mar 20 09:51:05 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38A35D13276 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 09:51:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]) (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 A4E0A1E70 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 09:51:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (ezra.dcm1.omnilan.net [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a135]) by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v2K9p3Db074441; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:51:03 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net (titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net [IPv6:2001:a60:f0bb:1::3:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A961EFF6; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:51:02 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <58CFA606.7090306@omnilan.de> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:51:02 +0100 From: Harry Schmalzbauer Organization: OmniLAN User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; de-DE; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100906 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vincenzo Maffione CC: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Are ./valte-ctl and ./bridge friends or competitors? References: <58CBA727.3040108@omnilan.de> <58CBBF7A.8050604@omnilan.de> <58CC26CF.5050708@omnilan.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]); Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:51:03 +0100 (CET) X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: mx0.gentlemail.de; Sender-ip: ; Sender-helo: mh0.gentlemail.de; ) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 09:51:05 -0000 Bezüglich Vincenzo Maffione's Nachricht vom 18.03.2017 09:29 (localtime): >… >>> Actually, there is pending work on bhyve and netmap, that is going to be >>> merged soon, available at https://github.com/vmaffione/freebsd/ in >>> branch ptnet-head. >>> >>> If you are interested, here there is some information >>> https://wiki.freebsd.org/DevSummit/201609?action= >> AttachFile&do=view&target=20160923-freebsd-summit-ptnet.pdf >>> > AttachFile&do=view&target=20160923-freebsd-summit-ptnet.pdf> >>> together with bhyve cmdlines. Congratulations, nice work and presentation :-) … >> So I'm a bit lost regarding furhter decisions. My prefered if_lagg(4) >> setup doesn't work with netmap at the moment, if_bridge(4) has >> in-house-overhead and forces me to either drop jumbo frames completely >> or use 9k MTU for any bridge member. >> Will look into openvSwitch. Or better get some card providing VFs? >> Or wait the ptnet merge and check if I can deploy my desired setup then? >> And, I want to keep TSO and HWVLAN_TAG on the host interfaces… >> >> > It depends on your requirements, in terms of connectivity between VMs and > NICs and required performance (for a given workload, e.g. average > packet-size, average packet rate, etc.). > If you really want TSO an other offloadings on the phyisical NIC, then you > cannot use that NIC in netmap mode (e.g. attaching it to VALE). So to summarize for newbies exploring netmap(4) world in combination with physical uplinks and virtual interfaces, it's important to do the following uplink NIC configuration (ifconfig(8)): -rxcsum -txcsum -rxcsum6 -txcsum6 -tso -lro promisc I guess vlanhwtag, vlanhwfilter and vlanhwtso don't interfere, do they? Thanks, -harry