Re: Re : Re: netgraph and vpp
- In reply to: Benoit Chesneau : "Re : Re: netgraph and vpp"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 06:04:37 UTC
On Nov 25, 2023 at 4:09:29 AM, Benoit Chesneau <benoitc@enki-multimedia.eu> wrote: > > Thanks for your answer. So i guess if we want to build a modern router > without custom code, vpp is the way to go in term de performance? > Well, that’s the path I chose back in 2016, yes. (Might note that I also run the pfsense project, and that VPP does not currently run on FreeBSD.) One thing i really miss ito cross connect 2 interfaces without using a > bridge. Somethibg really easy and performant with vpp... > kp@ added something similar using pf https://reviews.freebsd.org/D37193 but if_bridge is pretty performant these days https://issue.freebsdfoundation.org/publication/?i=660151 Benoit > Le sam. 25 nov. 2023 à 00:33, Jim Thompson <jim@netgate.com <Le sam. 25 > nov. 2023 à 00:33, Jim Thompson <<a href=>> a écrit : > > > > On Nov 24, 2023 at 12:48:07 AM, Benoit Chesneau < > benoitc@enki-multimedia.eu> wrote: > >> netgraph and vpp looks similar in their intent. Both are graphs to >> process packets. >> >> I thought that usinv netgraph sounds interresting to build a modern >> router or cpe. What about the perforance? Did anyone compRe? Also is there >> any difference in term of implementation of the processing? Id there any >> recent paper about netgraph? >> > > They are very, very different. Netgraph is closer to AT&T streams, but > with mbufs. > > Netgraph would probably be better implemented these days as a set of > netmap modules, ala > https://github.com/zeek/packet-bricks or > https://github.com/outscale/packetgraph (this one is DPDK, but similar > architecture) > > > >