Thanks again Olivier. I'm glad to hear you're not performance concerned as we were at first glance. That seems to give us more room to maneuver.
Steve CSM On May 10, 2012, at 7:27 AM, Olivier Bilodeau wrote: > On 05/09/2012 01:29 PM, Steve Wittstruck wrote: >> p.s., Olivier, discussion this morning lead to the possibility of >> too many node categories/customvlans breaking PF performance and/or code, so >> we are reassessing how many customvlans to use in combination with >> default (normal) switch vlans. >> > > I wouldn't for the sole reason of performance as the impact is marginal > now (we improved the biggest hit in 2.2.1 or the one later IIRC). > > However, for the sake of one's sanity, reducing the number of VLANs can > be a good thing. > > -- > Olivier Bilodeau > [email protected] :: +1.514.447.4918 *115 :: www.inverse.ca > Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence > (www.packetfence.org) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ PacketFence-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
