From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: Route cache performance under stress Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 15:10:25 +0200 Sender: linux-net-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <874r30r9z2.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> References: <87wuge59w2.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <20030526.233211.54217447.davem@redhat.com> <87he70re62.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <20030608.050500.28795668.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-net@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20030608.050500.28795668.davem@redhat.com> (David S. Miller's message of "Sun, 08 Jun 2003 05:05:00 -0700 (PDT)") List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org "David S. Miller" writes: > Although, I hope it's not "too similar" to what CEF does because > undoubtedly Cisco has a bazillion patents in this area. Most things in this area are patented, and the patents are extremely fuzzy (e.g. policy-based routing with hierarchical sequence of decisions has been patented countless times). 8-( > This is actually an argument for coming up with out own algorithms > without any knowledge of what CEF does or might do. :( The branchless variant is not described in the IOS book, and I can't tell if Cisco routers use it. If this idea is really novel, we are in pretty good shape because we no longer use trees, tries or whatever, but a DFA. 8-) Further parameters which could be tweaked is the kind of adjacency information (where to store the L2 information, whether to include the prefix length in the adjacency record etc.).