On 07/07/2016 09:34 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Rick Jones <rick.jon...@hpe.com> writes:
300 routers is far from the upper limit/goal. Back in HP Public
Cloud, we were running as many as 700 routers per network node (*),
and more than four network nodes. (back then it was just the one
namespace per router and network). Mileage will of course vary based
on the "oomph" of one's network node(s).
To clarify processes for these routers and dhcp servers are created
with "ip netns exec"?
I believe so, but it would be good to have someone else confirm that,
and speak to your paragraph below.
If that is the case and you are using this feature as effectively a
lightweight container and not lots vrfs in a single network stack
then I suspect much larger gains can be had by creating a variant
of ip netns exec avoids the mount propagation.
...
* Didn't want to go much higher than that because each router had a
port on a common linux bridge and getting to > 1024 would be an
unpleasant day.
* I would have thought all you have to do is bump of the size
of the linux neighbour cache. echo $BIGNUM >
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/neigh/default/gc_thresh3
We didn't want to hit the 1024 port limit of a (then?) Linux bridge.
rick
Having a bit of deja vu but I suspect things like commit
0818bf27c05b2de56c5b2bd08cfae2a939bd5f52 are not exactly on the same
wavelength, just my brain seeing "namespaces" and "performance" and
lighting-up :)
