> On Oct 15, 2014, at 4:06 PM, compdoc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > There has been some testing using BSDRP, but it is not "a tool to test
> > hardware".
>
> I used it as a tool to benchmark my hardware. There are several examples on
> their website of using it for just that purpose.
I am well-aware of Olivier’s work in this area, as are many in the FreeBSD
community.
> >You were testing forwarding, by the look of it. This is not all there is
> >to routing.
>
> The testing results I posted were pure packets per second without forwarding.
> I also tested forwarding but did not post the results, and I mentioned that.
So this (“pure packets per second without forwarding”) reduces to just “testing
netmap”.
> >>However, I will mention one thing: if you try to route 1.488M packets per
> >>second through the 'generic' pfSense, it will crash after a minute or so.
> >
> >That's an interesting result. We've not seen it.
>
> These crashes happened during a forwarding test using pfSense. I disabled
> packet filtering to try to lessen overhead, but it doesn’t seem that pfSense
> is designed to push a great flood of very tiny packets for any length of
> time, in one interface and out another.
>
> And I don’t fault it for that. For normal types of traffic, it’s a very
> capable firewall. It would be interesting to know your results.
You’re still assigning fault to pfSense, haven’t properly documented what
you’re seeing (thus your assertion that this is pfSense, rather than something
in your hardware or in
the testing environment) is not well-supported) and haven’t even answered my
questions asking for more detail.
I am also well-aware of the performance issues with pf. We’re working on it.
You may have missed the blog post yesterday (https://blog.pfsense.org/?p=1473
<https://blog.pfsense.org/?p=1473>).
Jim
_______________________________________________
List mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
