Hi david & all,
As implemented now, the default memory allocated in net.core.optmem_max
permit
to join up to 320 (S,G) channels per sockets (for IPv6, each channels
cost 32bytes in
net.core.optmem_max), thing is that net.ipv6.mld_max_msf is setting an
hard limit on it, so assuming that you don't change the value of
net.core.opmem_max, would it make sense to increase net.ipv6.mld_max_msf
to let say, 256 ? the rest of the memory can
still be used for various option setup on the socket.
Cheers,
Hoerdt Mickaël
David Stevens wrote:
[I'm CC-ing Dave Miller and Yoshifuji Hideaki; you probably ought to bring
this up on
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hoerdt,
I don't object to increasing the default, but how much is a good
question. For an
include-mode filter, it'll do a linear search on the sources for every
packet received for
that group. If those are large numbers, then an administrator should
decide that's a good
use of the machine, I think.
The reports are (roughly) an n^2 algorithm in the number of
sources. The per-packet
filtering can be improved by using a hash for source look-ups, but I don't
think there's a
significant improvement for report computations (it's n^3 in the obvious
way, so already pretty good).
I've done testing with hundreds of sources and no apparent
performance problems
(though performance isn't what I was testing). I don't know what a
reasonable limit on
reasonable hardware is.
Like the per-socket group limit, this one is probably too low for
common applications,
and also like that, easily evaded. 1024 or 2048 as the default seems high
to me, on the
assumption that a few apps doing that would kill performance, but since I
haven't tested,
I don't really know.
I also see it appears not to be enforced in the full-state API (an
oversight, unless
I'm missing the check when I look now).
I don't see any problem with bumping this up to, say, 64,
immediately, which would
solve the immediate problem, I guess. But I'm not the maintainer. :-) I
think some stress
testing to show how well this scales for higher numbers would be
appropriate before
going too high. If you have numbers (or can get them), that'd help. I
wouldn't mind doing
some tests along these lines myself, but I don't expect to have much
uncommitted time
available through December.
+-DLS
Hoerdt Mickael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/30/2005 08:29:51
AM:
Hello David,
It seems for me that net.ipv6.mld_max_msf and and igmp_max_msf default
values are
a little bit too short for multi-source multicast applications. On the
M6bone, we
are using a software named dbeacon
(,http://mars.innerghost.net.ipv4.sixxs.org/matrix/) which joins a high
number (currently it's up to 30 sources) SSM sources on the same socket.
This create a management problem because when users are installing it :
root admin must change this value, but dbeacon is run by normal users on
the hosts.
For Layered multicast, this can be a problem too, It's easy to imagine a
flow with 256
different layer, FLUTE application is one implementation of this
layered multicast concept (http://atm.tut.fi/mad/) .Could it be possible
to increase this default value to let say, 1024 or 2048 ? If not
possible, could you tell me why, and then we may consider developping an
application layer instanciating several sockets for joining a high
number of SSM channels per application.
Thank you,
Hoerdt Mickaël
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
