[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <A2EB721D-3AC9-4815-ADCC-EC0B311C5AE7@ntop.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:26:25 +0200
From: Luca Deri <deri@...p.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: bcook@...intsys.com, brad.doctor@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PF_RING: Include in main line kernel?
David
I agree that some PF_RING features could be merged into PF_PACKET.
However PF_RING is not just about improving packet capture but it
implements facilities that can be used by many monitoring applications
including, packet balancing, reflection, layer-7 packet filtering,
pf_ring socket clustering just to name a few. You can read about
PF_RING feature into this tutorial: http://luca.ntop.org/IM2009_Tutorial.pdf
So if the decision is to include in PF_PACKET some unique features
present in PF_RING, I will not be against that, even if I think that
the PF_RING design is different from PF_PACKET, that IMHO is limited
to packet capture.
Regards Luca
On Oct 14, 2009, at 10:15 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Luca Deri <deri@...p.org>
> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 21:54:26 +0200
>
>> - packets to be filtered using both BPF and ACL-like filters
>
> To me this is all that PF_RING adds, the ACL filter features.
>
> And I see no reason why that can't be added to PF_PACKET, we've
> extended PF_PACKET in many ways before (even the mmap ring
> buffer layout can be modified trivially) so there is no reason
> we can't add the ACL filter feature to PF_PACKET as well.
>
> Adding all of PF_RING just for that is a joke.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists