From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [patch 5/6] [Network namespace] ipv4 isolation
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:27:52 -0700
Message-ID: <448A1208.3060602@hp.com>
References: <20060609210202.215291000@localhost.localdomain>	<20060609210631.346330000@localhost.localdomain> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0606092022320.17380@d.namei>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dlezcano@fr.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, serue@us.ibm.com, haveblue@us.ibm.com,
	clg@fr.ibm.com
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from palrel10.hp.com ([156.153.255.245]:22990 "EHLO palrel10.hp.com")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932611AbWFJA14 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 20:27:56 -0400
To: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0606092022320.17380@d.namei>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

James Morris wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, dlezcano@fr.ibm.com wrote:
> 
> 
>>When an outgoing packet has the loopback destination addres, the
>>skbuff is filled with the network namespace. So the loopback packets
>>never go outside the namespace. This approach facilitate the migration
>>of loopback because identification is done by network namespace and
>>not by address. The loopback has been benchmarked by tbench and the
>>overhead is roughly 1.5 %
> 
> 
> I think you'll need to make it so this code has zero impact when not 
> configured.

Indeed, and over stuff other than loopback too.  I'll not so humbly 
suggest :)  netperf TCP_STREAM and TCP_RR figures _with_ CPU 
utilization/service demand measures.

rick jones