[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AF6029F.6020403@hp.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:28:31 -0800
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To: Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>
CC: Peter P Waskiewicz Jr <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
Caitlin Bestler <caitlin.bestler@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: ethtool support for n-tuple filter programming
Bill Fink wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009, Peter P Waskiewicz Jr wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 11:12 -0800, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
>>
>>>The approach you are proposing assumes what type of packet filters
>>>that L2 hardware could support.
>>>
>>>Why not simply use existing filtering rules that overshoot the target,
>>>such as netfilter, and ask the
>>>device specific tool to indicate what set of these rules it can support?
>>
>>Are you proposing that netfilter is modified to pass the filters down to
>>the hardware if it supports it? netfilter doesn't steer flows though to
>>queues (or flow ID's in the kernel), plus that's putting HW-specific
>>capabilities into netfilter. I'm not sure we want to do that.
>>
>>Please correct me if I'm wrong with interpreting your suggestion.
>
>
> Plus I believe using netfilter has a significant performance penalty,
> and it would be desirable to use such a feature without incurring
> this penalty when there was otherwise no need to use netfilter.
At the risk of typing words into someone's keyboard, I interpreted it as
suggesting using the filtering language of netfilter or something similar, not
necessarily netfilter itself?
rick jones
--
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