From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: "Mathieu Giguere" <Mathieu.Giguere@ericsson.ca>
Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IPv4 and IPv6 stack multi-FIB, scalable in the million of entries.
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 19:18:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3ptaiwfpq.fsf@averell.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1IJuR-8qH-39@gated-at.bofh.it> (Mathieu Giguere's message of "Thu, 08 Apr 2004 17:21:01 +0200")
"Mathieu Giguere" <Mathieu.Giguere@ericsson.ca> writes:
[you should probably discuss that on netdev@oss.sgi.com instead, cc'ed]
> We currently looking for a multi-FIB, scalable routing table in the
> million of entries, no routing cache for IPv4 and IPv6. We want a IP stack
No routing cache? Doesn't sound like a good idea.
> that can have a log(n) (or better) insertion/deletion and lookup
> performance. Predictable performance, even in the million of entries.
And even more vast overkill for most linux users than the existing
routing code already is. Linux has at least the beginnings of a pluggable
FIB interface (fib_table), which has slightly bit rotted, but probably
not too bad. I would suggest you clean that up, make the existing
hash table really optional and then you can just plug in anything you want.
> I join a patch with the fib_hash in IPv4 replace with a patricia tree
> ready for multi-FIB base on a 2.4.22 kernel. This is the beginning of a
> long cleanup.
What do you consider dirty in the current stack?
-Andi
next parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-08 17:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1IJuR-8qH-39@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-04-08 17:18 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2004-04-08 18:10 ` IPv4 and IPv6 stack multi-FIB, scalable in the million of entries Mathieu Giguere
2004-04-08 18:33 ` David S. Miller
2004-04-08 18:34 ` alex
2004-04-08 19:53 Mathieu Giguere
2004-04-09 1:05 ` jamal
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-04-08 21:16 Krishna Kumar
2004-04-09 13:16 Ronnie Sahlberg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3ptaiwfpq.fsf@averell.firstfloor.org \
--to=ak@muc.de \
--cc=Mathieu.Giguere@ericsson.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).