Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 29 Nov 2001 11:59:09 -0800
From:      Eric Melville <eric@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Nyteckjobs@aol.com
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, tedm@toybox.placo.com
Subject:   Re: (no subject)
Message-ID:  <20011129115909.A75251@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <14e.4d05ff7.29371325@aol.com>; from Nyteckjobs@aol.com on Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 11:27:17PM -0500
References:  <14e.4d05ff7.29371325@aol.com>

next in thread | previous 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.
> 
> Lets face it. If you were going to sit down and design an interface for frame 
> relay, multi-protocol support, etc, you'd have to be smoking something pretty 
> strong to come up with netgraph.  But its free and there is source, so it 
> must be great!

Dennis, if you are going to continue trolling FreeBSD mailing lists from
your AOL account, you should really consider choosing a name that does not
coincide with what we already know or can easily find out about you.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011129115909.A75251>