On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 11:27:17PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > The concept that "netgraph hooks" are a "leg up" on say, ETs drivers that > have integrated bandwidth management and prioritization, WAN bridging > support, load balancing and a probably 25% performance advantage is a bit > entertaining. Unless you need to do some convoluted encapsulation netgraph > is, aside from being appallingly non-standard to anything else in the market, > not much of an "advantage", and its a poster child for the trade off of > "flexibility" versus performance. > > Lets face it. If you were going to sit down and design an interface for frame > relay, multi-protocol support, etc, you'd have to be smoking something pretty > strong to come up with netgraph. But its free and there is source, so it > must be great!
Please please please! Have you read the source code for netgraph? It may be unintentional on your part but the above paragraph reads like you've made an assumption about what netgraph is and how it works and have decided that it's inefficient and therefore of not much use. Netgraph is great, but not because it's free and there is source. It's great because conceptually it's like lego, and in effeciency it's very quick. Netgraph hooks in device drivers are extremely useful. Who's smoking anything? You or me? Joe
msg28977/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
