Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 19:54:58 EST From: A180009977889@aol.com To: hackers@freebsd.org Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: re: netgraph Message-ID: <23.1547b480.293832e2@aol.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The concept that "netgraph hooks" are a "leg up" on say, ETs drivers that > have integrated bandwidth management and prioritization, WAN bridging > support, load balancing and a probably 25% performance advantage is a bit > entertaining. Unless you need to do some convoluted encapsulation netgraph > is, aside from being appallingly non-standard to anything else in the market, > not much of an "advantage", and its a poster child for the trade off of > "flexibility" versus performance. J. Elschier wrote... >Netgraph is a prototyping tool, which has enough performance to be useful >in non-performance-critical applications. (such as all sync interfaces). >It is not designed for gigabit interfaces etc. Im sure the guy with 900 DLCIs on his T3 would not agree that performance is :not an issue" on sync interfaces.. Performance is always an issue, except maybe with tcpdump. This short-sightedness is just what Im referring to. Making netgraph a plug-in option is fine and desireable. Touting it as "the way" to do things is damaging to the OS in general,particuarly when you are not willing to accept alternatives provided by commercial vendors. The best solution is to provide "options" to users. You adulterate the OS by trying to make it do everything, when its very easy to provide clean hooks so that different solutions can be seamlessly used depending on what is best for a particular application. if_ethersubr.c is beginning to look like an abortion, when one or two simple pre and post processing hooks would allow for both open-source and commercial solutions, to be used at the users discretion. Its a matter of thinking about it and coming up with something that makes sense, rather that the "I have something that works so lets stuff it into the OS". just my opinion. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?23.1547b480.293832e2>