Vlad Galu wrote:
>
> Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> |Hi again,
> |
> | Thanks for all your answers.
> |
> | A small comment though.
> |
> |Vlad Galu wrote:
> |
> |> Try fxp. It has better polling support, and there's the
> |>advantage of
> |>the link0 flag. When it's set,
Vlad Galu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
||Hi again,
||
|| Thanks for all your answers.
||
|| A small comment though.
||
||Vlad Galu wrote:
||
||> Try fxp. It has better polling support, and there's the
||>advantage of
||>the link0 flag. When it's
Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Hi again,
|
| Thanks for all your answers.
|
| A small comment though.
|
|Vlad Galu wrote:
|
|> Try fxp. It has better polling support, and there's the
|>advantage of
|>the link0 flag. When it's set, the interface won't send interrupts to
|
| Th
Hi again,
Thanks for all your answers.
A small comment though.
Vlad Galu wrote:
> Try fxp. It has better polling support, and there's the
>advantage of
>the link0 flag. When it's set, the interface won't send interrupts to
The man page sais that only some versions of the chipset sup
Vlad Galu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
||Hi,
||
|| At one site that I administer we have a gateway server which
|services|a large SOHO LAN (more than 300 stations) and I'm facing a
|serious|issue: very often we see strong spoofed floods (variable sou
I administer some home networks with 200..500 users on port
and 5..12 ports on each router.
The trouble is that router can't do somethig useful when
link saturated. The only effective way found is
2..3 mb/s restriction _from_ every user on each switch port
PS
typical router has Tyan 2466N-4M mobo
In reply to David Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
> In our experience, switch to fxp ethernet cards, test several
> motherboards and enable polling.
>
> fxp and em cards appear to have the best performance ... outrunning
> other cards by a fair margin.
Hmmmwe've been using SysKonnect (older o
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Richard Wendland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wri
tes:
> > device polling(8) really does help _alot_ for packet floods/storms.
> > for device polling to work properly (imho) you would need to set HZ
> > to 1000.
> > I dont recommend any higher HZ on a PIII.
>
> Incidentally, s
> "Adrian" == Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Adrian> Hi, At one site that I administer we have a gateway server
Adrian> which services a large SOHO LAN (more than 300 stations) and
Adrian> I'm facing a serious issue: very often we see strong spoofed
Adrian> floods (variable sourc
Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Hi,
|
| At one site that I administer we have a gateway server which services
|a large SOHO LAN (more than 300 stations) and I'm facing a serious
|issue: very often we see strong spoofed floods (variable source IP and
|port, variable destination IP, d
> device polling(8) really does help _alot_ for packet floods/storms.
> for device polling to work properly (imho) you would need to set HZ to 1000.
> I dont recommend any higher HZ on a PIII.
Incidentally, setting HZ > 1000 would cause FreeBSD TCP to not comply
with RFC1323, as it would make the
>
> What can I do to make the system better handle this kind of
> traffic ?
> Could device polling(8) or just increasing the kernel
> frequency clock to 1000Hz or more improve the situation ?
> What kind of network cards could face a lot better this
> burden ? Are there any other solutions
Hi,
At one site that I administer we have a gateway server which services
a large SOHO LAN (more than 300 stations) and I'm facing a serious
issue: very often we see strong spoofed floods (variable source IP and
port, variable destination IP, destination port 80) which can go as far
as 100 000 p
13 matches
Mail list logo
