From nobody Sun Oct 08 09:14:23 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-net@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4S3GhB0b6Sz4vy7W for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2023 09:14:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from meka@tilda.center) Received: from c3po.tilda.center (c3po.tilda.center [108.61.164.129]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4S3Gh91jmtz3Nc6 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2023 09:14:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from meka@tilda.center) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=tilda.center header.s=c3po header.b=Hs+GRh5B; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of meka@tilda.center designates 108.61.164.129 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=meka@tilda.center; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=tilda.center Received: from [192.168.111.5] (meka.rs [109.93.255.137]) by c3po.tilda.center (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 660043EBE2 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2023 11:11:29 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tilda.center; s=c3po; t=1696756289; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=AzO1D7QWZkWYDxqrIALXXsLpG6hh1ylfx0Kxt+cg5lc=; b=Hs+GRh5B7tI8n2VOA4ooCJCCTbwnpCkqJb7R/ABsLjdAiEVjmU2MDaNMqfb5ArdxfDumne M3hriNmx5au/OEA0Tb3YbWbzMfAvfCaUtsXHF9rBvRvIWGPleYugAOrpT3eF+9c9CDmdDS dtC9XGgJqJ0HECKIpTNtaypc1CaAfh8= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------U5JHDsEWSSKVPHMg0l5vulSI" Message-ID: <4d47bea3-ac8e-4fbd-b3d6-c2b31787218c@tilda.center> Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2023 11:14:23 +0200 List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: performance of netgraph vs bridge Content-Language: en-US To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <8TsgleaEQvM9JuQ2FXMCzDanns20vIJv_1QPZC7lg39xxR9cKCfsR1WHKaM3j0AqQqxdpzbFBVN6J0SVp056lYTgAMpTnFu9r5GzulETBnY=@enki-multimedia.eu> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Goran_Meki=C4=87?= In-Reply-To: <8TsgleaEQvM9JuQ2FXMCzDanns20vIJv_1QPZC7lg39xxR9cKCfsR1WHKaM3j0AqQqxdpzbFBVN6J0SVp056lYTgAMpTnFu9r5GzulETBnY=@enki-multimedia.eu> X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.33 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.999]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.996]; R_MIXED_CHARSET(0.56)[subject]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[tilda.center,reject]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[tilda.center:s=c3po]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; XM_UA_NO_VERSION(0.01)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; BLOCKLISTDE_FAIL(0.00)[108.61.164.129:server fail]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[tilda.center:+]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:20473, ipnet:108.61.164.0/22, country:US]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4S3Gh91jmtz3Nc6 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------U5JHDsEWSSKVPHMg0l5vulSI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 10/8/23 11:00, Benoit Chesneau wrote: > Before I am doing some performance tests myself, did someone comparend > netgraph ng_bridge vs if_bridge with recent multi thread additions in > netgraph ? > > The advantage I see in using netgraph is remooving the need of using > tap interfaces  and instead using netgraph sockets.  Which seems to be > more integrated. > > One of the issue I have with netgraph is its lack of inclusion in > bastille. > > Any feedback is welcome, > > Benoît Chesneau, Enki Multimedia > — > t. +33608655490 > > Sent with Proton Mail secure email. https://klarasystems.com/articles/using-netgraph-for-freebsds-bhyve-networking/ --------------U5JHDsEWSSKVPHMg0l5vulSI Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On 10/8/23 11:00, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
Before I am doing some performance tests myself, did someone comparend netgraph ng_bridge vs if_bridge with recent multi thread additions in netgraph ? 

The advantage I see in using netgraph is remooving the need of using tap interfaces  and instead using netgraph sockets.  Which seems to be more integrated.

One of the issue I have with netgraph is its lack of inclusion in bastille.

Any feedback is welcome,

Benoît Chesneau, Enki Multimedia
—
t. +33608655490 

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

https://klarasystems.com/articles/using-netgraph-for-freebsds-bhyve-networking/

--------------U5JHDsEWSSKVPHMg0l5vulSI--