*Thanks for quick reply. * *I just read the mail from Matthew **(http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/commits/2014-June/270300.html <http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/commits/2014-June/270300.html>). But still quite blur on it! I think it is better to compare the source of PF.*
*And I noticed that **"* state and ip fragment tables are now per-cpu.", so in ipfw of DFly, every changes will be dispatch to context of all CPUs, so it is also per-cpu, right ? Can we say that the ipfw in DFly also "**able to work in a concurrent manner on many CPUs"?* *Regards,* *bycn82* On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Jyri Hovila [Turvamies.fi] < [email protected]> wrote: > > > > *But what does it mean? Anyone can help to explain this? what is the > benefit to have a PF which can concurrently manner on multiple CPUs? *To > be a bit more specific, having several CPUs processing the traffic simply > means your firewall / load balancer can handle bigger bandwidth without > becoming clogged. The one-threaded nature of PF has been a very limiting > factor with OpenBSD, the "forefather" of DragonFlyBSD. > > -j. > > -- > +358-50-5632104 (24/7) > +358-46-8822157 (backup) > [email protected] >
