netdev - Re: increase the number of routing tables

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4F26D2C1.7030108@candelatech.com>
Date:	Mon, 30 Jan 2012 09:26:25 -0800
From:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, simonchennj@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: increase the number of routing tables

On 01/29/2012 01:01 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Greear<greearb@...delatech.com>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:46:01 -0800
>
>> On 01/28/2012 06:41 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> Its is possible, but probably not scalable.
>>
>> I've run with a few thousand routing tables and probably 5000 or so
>> rules.  It seems to run OK....
>>
>>> You really should not have too many "ip rule" entries, since they are
>>> evaluated linearly.
>>
>> For every packet, or maybe just until conn-track gets an entry
>> for the connection?
>
> When the routing cache is removed, using a huge number of rules is not
> going to be something you want to do any more because the rule table
> will be inspected on every route lookup.

Well, that sounds like a reason to keep the routing cache around,
even if it isn't used by default, perhaps.

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

--
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