Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:09:42 +0300 From: Pavel Odintsov <pavel.odintsov@gmail.com> To: Eduardo Meyer <dudu.meyer@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: netmap-ipfw: kipfw two instances sharing same port Message-ID: <CALgsdbdTxc7T-hxd4LjO940d0RSHW7ttPQ%2BdfBwOGC=FYKow%2Bw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAEqdE_6EEwyMur161KpKqas_gcJb2mnn-Zb_q65%2BObbJD2oePw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAEqdE_6EEwyMur161KpKqas_gcJb2mnn-Zb_q65%2BObbJD2oePw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello! You could enable multiple queues for each NIC and run single instance of kipfw on each pair: kipfw netmap:ix0-0 netmap:ix1-0 kipfw netmap:ix0-1 netmap:ix1-1 And so on ;) i have about 12 mpps with this configuration (on Linux netmap). On Friday, July 10, 2015, Eduardo Meyer <dudu.meyer@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > should ./kipfw <port0> <port1> and another ./kipfw <port0> <port2> work? > > I want to have two filtered kipfw instances sharing the same WAN port. > > So far I did a quick test lab and it worked, but since it's a lab > environment I don't know if I should expect other problems when I add it to > run in a real scenario. > > What problems should I expect? Can they be minimized? > > Basic stateless filtering only. > > -- > =========== > Eduardo Meyer > pessoal: dudu.meyer@gmail.com <javascript:;> > profissional: ddm.farmaciap@saude.gov.br <javascript:;> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org <javascript:;> mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org > <javascript:;>" > -- Sincerely yours, Pavel Odintsov
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CALgsdbdTxc7T-hxd4LjO940d0RSHW7ttPQ%2BdfBwOGC=FYKow%2Bw>