Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 04:04:38 -0000 From: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> To: pf4freebsd@freelists.org Subject: [pf4freebsd] Re: Maturity of this port? Message-ID: <200405261144.39641.max@love2party.net> In-Reply-To: <6.1.0.6.2.20040526015840.0ddfad28@213.161.193.184> References: <40B2DAD4.2040005@computeraddictions.com.au> <40B2E306.1060909@computeraddictions.com.au> <6.1.0.6.2.20040526015840.0ddfad28@213.161.193.184>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Boundary-02=_HcGtANrqtL963hF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 26 May 2004 02:05, Arnaud Pignard wrote: > At 08:09 25/05/2004, you wrote: > >D'oh; I really do need ALTQ. > > If you really need ALTQ, try here : > http://www.rofug.ro/projects/freebsd-altq/ Chances are, that my patchset is more stable that the rofug.ro one which I= =20 evolved from (I have said this, haven't I?). > Work fine with 5.2.1 and drivers is avaible for most all good network car= d. > (don't specified in changelog but em driver is also stable) 1) As I have said (several times) the drivers from rofug.ro work with this= =20 patchset without problems. If they are stable there, they are stable here a= s=20 well. 2) The patchset from rofug.ro has a couple of problems: a) The locking is incomplete. Passing pktattr on the stack isn't MPSAFE by= =20 design. b) It provides ALTQ3 support only, which is - in my opinion - no longer st= ate=20 of-the-art. The built-in classifier has very limited capabilities, the= =20 syntax is a pain and the implementation isn't all that powerful either. c) It is a bit dated in terms of being in sync with KAME as well as in bei= ng=20 in sync with FreeBSD. I am afraid there are currently no efforts to cha= nge=20 this situation. d) As it "grew" over the years it has some issues both in drivers and the= =20 altq code itself. That is why I started from zero, importing the necess= ary=20 pieces step by step, to clean it up and have a completely working thing= =20 that will eventually be ready for import. > Also i prefer altq config file and i'm not sure that's you can use altqst= at > with pf. That is well choice of taste, but as I tried to explain: ALTQ3 isn't MPSAFE= by=20 design! Altqstat is not useable with pf, but pf has its own way $pfctl -vvs= q=20 gives the same information in a (imo) nicer way. I will not stop anyone from implementing ALTQ3-support (forgetting about th= e=20 locking problems for a moment), but I think that there is much more power i= n=20 the pf-approach. If you are brave, you can implement the altq classifier in= =20 terms of a pfil_hooks-consumer useing mbuf_tag classification, this will be= =20 easier in terms of locking but does not seem worthwhile to me. =2D-=20 Best regards, | mlaier@freebsd.org Max Laier | ICQ #67774661 http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | mlaier@EFnet --Boundary-02=_HcGtANrqtL963hF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBAtGcHXyyEoT62BG0RAgyEAJsEPlWBDIURXn7M/aaL9wUZPGZ8AQCdGQrv PlWGduUWmZuSSDd96GY8vnc= =Fayf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_HcGtANrqtL963hF--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200405261144.39641.max>