On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:54:34PM -0400, George Neville-Neil wrote: > > On Sep 14, 2013, at 15:24 , Luigi Rizzo <ri...@iet.unipi.it> wrote: > > > > > > > On Saturday, September 14, 2013, Olivier Cochard-Labb? <oliv...@cochard.me> > > wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Luigi Rizzo <ri...@iet.unipi.it> wrote: > > >> > > >> IXIA ? For the timescales we need to address we don't need an IXIA, > > >> a netmap sender is more than enough > > >> > > > > > > The great netmap generates only one IP flow (same src/dst IP and same > > > src/dst port). > > > > True the sample app generates only one flow but it is trivial to modify it > > to generate multiple flows. My point was, we have the ability to generate > > high rate traffic, as long as we do tolerate a .1-1us jitter. Beyond that, > > you do need some ixia-like solution. > > > > On the bandwidth side, can a modern sender with netmap really do a full 10G? > I hate the cost of an > IXIA but I have not been able to destroy our stack as effectively with > anything else.
yes george, you can download the picobsd image http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/netmap/20120618-netmap-picobsd-head-amd64.bin and try for yourself. Granted this does not have all the knobs of an ixia but it can surely blast the full 14.88 Mpps to the link, and it only takes a bit of userspace programming to generate reasonably arbitrary streams of packets. A netmap sender/receiver is not CPU bound even with 1 core. cheers luigi > Best, > George _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
