On 07/15/2018 10:56 AM, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
On 07/15/2018 09:03 AM, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
On 2018-07-14 22:05, Baldur Norddahl wrote: About OVS, i didnt looked much at it, as i thought it is not suitable for BNG purposes,
On 2018-07-15 19:00, Raymond Burkholder wrote: like for tens of thousands users termination, i thought it is more about high speed switching for tens of VM.
I would call it more of a generic all purpose tool for customized L2/L3/L4/L5 packet forwarding. It works well for datacenter as well as ISP related scenarios. Due to the wide variety of rule matching, encapsulations supported, and the ability to attach a customized controller for specialized packet handling.
On edge based translations, is hardware based forwarding actually necessary, since there are so many software functions being performed anyway? IMO at current moment 20-40G on single box is a boundary point when packet forwarding is preferable(but still not necessary) to do in hardware, as passing packets thru whole Linux stack is really not best option. But it works. I'm trying to find an alternative solution, bypassing full stack using XDP, so i can go beyond 40G.
Tied to XDP is eBPF (which is what makes tcpdump fast). Another tool is P4 which provides tools to build customized SW/HW forwarders. But I'm not sure how applicable it is to BNG. -- Raymond Burkholder ray@oneunified.net https://blog.raymond.burkholder.net