From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933244AbWFZXKJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:10:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751211AbWFZXJx (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:09:53 -0400 Received: from ns2.lanforge.com ([66.165.47.211]:48039 "EHLO ns2.lanforge.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933244AbWFZXJ3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:09:29 -0400 Message-ID: <44A068E7.6080403@candelatech.com> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 16:08:23 -0700 From: Ben Greear Organization: Candela Technologies User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.7.12-1.3.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Herbert Poetzl CC: "Eric W. Biederman" , Daniel Lezcano , Andrey Savochkin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, serue@us.ibm.com, haveblue@us.ibm.com, clg@fr.ibm.com, Andrew Morton , dev@sw.ru, devel@openvz.org, sam@vilain.net, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, Alexey Kuznetsov Subject: Re: [patch 2/6] [Network namespace] Network device sharing by view References: <20060609210202.215291000@localhost.localdomain> <20060609210625.144158000@localhost.localdomain> <20060626134711.A28729@castle.nmd.msu.ru> <449FF5A0.2000403@fr.ibm.com> <20060626192751.A989@castle.nmd.msu.ru> <44A00215.2040608@fr.ibm.com> <20060626183649.GB3368@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <44A05BFD.6030402@candelatech.com> <20060626225440.GA7425@MAIL.13thfloor.at> In-Reply-To: <20060626225440.GA7425@MAIL.13thfloor.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Herbert Poetzl wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 03:13:17PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > yes, that sounds good to me, any numbers how that > affects networking in general (performance wise and > memory wise, i.e. caches and hashes) ... I'll run some tests later today. Based on my previous tests, I don't remember any significant overhead. >>Using the mac-vlan and source-based routing tables, I can give a >>unique 'interface' to each process and have each process able to bind >>to the same IP port, for instance. Using source-based routing (by >>binding to a local IP explicitly and adding a route table for that >>source IP), I can give unique default routes to each interface as >>well. Since we cannot have more than 256 routing tables, this approach >>is currently limitted to around 250 virtual interfaces, but that is >>still a substantial amount. > > > an typically that would be sufficient IMHO, but > of course, a more 'general' hash tag would be > better in the long run ... I'm willing to offer a bounty (hardware, beer, money, ...) if someone will 'fix' this so we can have 1000 or more routes.... Being able to select these routes at a more global level (without having to specifically bind to a local IP would be nice as well.) Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com