Hi, For what it's worth --
1. We believe the newer IPRewriter elements, which were released slightly before 1.8.0, are faster than the the older elements -- perhaps even significantly. But I don't have specific measurements to report. 2. When doing more in-depth Click performance analysis (YEARS AGO) we used performance counter elements like SetCycleCount -> IPRewriter -> CycleCountAccum. If I was doing it now I might profile at userlevel using IP summary dumps. Eddie Latency Buster wrote: > Does anyone has a rough estimate of the port to port latency of NAT > using Click? I'm using a combination of IPClassifier, IPRewriter and > seeing the port to port latency varying between between 20 - 30 us. > This is when the IPRewriter has a single mapping instance and I am > using PollDevice for pulling packets. > > rw :: IPRewriter ( // > pattern 192.16.13.24 - 192.16.14.26 - 0 1, > //Active > ) > > > A related question: What's the approach to nail down the most delay > prone element along the packet path inside Click? In my instance, > Click is running on Intel Xeon processor (quad core), PCIe cards and > with 8GB RAM. > > > Thanks, > _______________________________________________ > click mailing list > [email protected] > https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click _______________________________________________ click mailing list [email protected] https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
