Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 09:53:57 +0200 From: Thomas <freebsdlists@bsdunix.ch> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Marcin Jessa <lists@yazzy.org> Subject: Re: trunk interface (was (no subject)) Message-ID: <1148025237.38606.6.camel@bert.mlan.solnet.ch> In-Reply-To: <446D19E7.2010804@elischer.org> References: <C378B27F-22B6-4905-9BE8-54BF47A400A7@bsdunix.ch> <20060518220945.f81a743a.lists@yazzy.org> <FCF0E8B5-C60F-4B87-810A-289C2D948B83@bsdunix.ch> <446D19E7.2010804@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am Donnerstag, den 18.05.2006, 18:05 -0700 schrieb Julian Elischer: > Thomas Vogt wrote: > > > Hi > > > > Thanks. I know about the netgraph ether/fec interfaces. But I thought > > about a solution without netgraph. AFAIK Netgraph implies overhead > > and ng_ehter is more complicated to set up. This is a problem with > > non technical people. I'm happy they already know a bit about > > ifconfig commands. > > > two items. > 1/ ng_fec only uses the config framework of netgraph. For data it goes > direct to the interfaces. Ah good to know. Since this is for a network course it would be easier if this "trunk" could be setup via ifconfig command. But I will try it. > 2/ netgraph is not that high an overhead. (what made you think it was?) Well I heard that netgraph has some overhead on various conferences. I'm planning to use such a feature on very very high loaded GigE router, every extra kernel hook could cost some performance, IMHO. Thanks and cheers, Thomas
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1148025237.38606.6.camel>