From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 3 21:20:09 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4200416A41C for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 21:20:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from schluting@gmail.com) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.194]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF4D43D53 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 21:20:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from schluting@gmail.com) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 12so1236044nzp for ; Fri, 03 Jun 2005 14:19:46 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=nx2eNV6aiHT8axLht4JZAUBmiGp5x0rfpbk/dZz8/22ugwwC5G8bf3JQgQ6/BM9MriABQqvNcL7dXhSPKD77Tlr0H7+FEA6UYYgv/6AgHWmUHPUH5lq+PD/DUPBAd+Tth2SSKzh96dlOPX6plmMeotORtMdJwwFoXjbVn3fLRoo= Received: by 10.36.220.53 with SMTP id s53mr1581495nzg; Fri, 03 Jun 2005 13:53:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.9.4 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 13:53:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <83946540050603135324d6b8cd@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 13:53:06 -0700 From: Charlie Schluting To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20050603202109.GA22098@gargantuan.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <20050603181636.GA54906@gicco.homeip.net> <20050603191351.GA54164@ip.net.ua> <20050603202109.GA22098@gargantuan.com> Subject: Re: route metric X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Charlie Schluting List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 21:20:09 -0000 > it would be nice to have a feature like this, where you could have > multiple same-prefix, same-metric routes in a FIB, and the packets would > be balanced to the next hop, either on a per-flow or per-packet basis. > i have seen a lot of answers to this request over the years along the > lines of ``FreeBSD isn't a router'', which is sad since it does perform > the task of packet routing exceedingly well, and a heck of a lot cheaper > than vendor C. all of the usual reasons that OSS is better apply here, > too. who wouldn't like SSH on all of their routers without paying $$$ > for a crypto image?!? >=20 It does do many things well enough, but have you tried to use dot1q on 5.x with an Intel chip? Those bugs are reason #1. You can't have a production router that reboot when you run tcpdump or traceroute :) Reason #2 is latency. Vendor C put a lot of time and money into features like CEF that take advantage of hardware packet forwarding. A purely software-based device simply can't keep up with large flows, and definitely introduces latency--especially when filtering. My $0.02 :) -Charlie