Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 01 Mar 1997 16:59:21 -0800
From:      David Greenman <dg@root.com>
To:        "David S. Miller" <davem@jenolan.rutgers.edu>
Cc:        netdev@roxanne.nuclecu.unam.mx, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ok, final sockhash changes, new diff 
Message-ID:  <199703020059.QAA00208@root.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 01 Mar 1997 19:40:50 EST." <199703020040.TAA09403@jenolan.caipgeneral> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Keep in mind that if you don't consider the local address in the hash
>you'll get screwed on machines with thousands of IP aliases doing
>virtual web service for many blocks of class C's.

   Hmmm. It seems that it might be better to add in the laddr if it contains
additional variable information, but I don't see how not doing so would be a
degenerate case when having a lot of IP aliases. The faddr, lport, and fport
are still just as variable as in the non-lots-of-aliases case, so the
hash distribution should be the same.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703020059.QAA00208>