From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Klauer Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 14:42:06 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] Scalability Message-Id: <415AC9BE.4070709@metamorpher.de> List-Id: References: <3063e50409290313b61b303@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3063e50409290313b61b303@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lartc@vger.kernel.org George Alexandru Dragoi wrote: > Perhaps a tweak would be to send 0x0 marked traffic to a chain and > apply such matches there, so really few traffic will go to p2p > matching. That's the way I'm doing it. But it's useful only if you're not blocking the p2p traffic. If you're blocking it, the connection should be closed anyway, so there's no need to check wether a connection was already marked or not. At least, ipp2p proposes it this way... you don't need connmark at all if you're just blocking all p2p traffic. However, the result won't be that "really few traffic" will go to p2p matching... it's just that the already identified p2p connections won't go to p2p matching again. All other traffic will still go to this chain. ipp2p has no "this is definitely NOT p2p" return value which would allow for further optimizations. You could try your luck with some other conditions, like if a connection was checked 10 times, don't check it again or something like that. HTH Andreas _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/