scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Eduardo Schoedler listas at esds.com.br
Tue Jan 27 16:27:28 UTC 2015


Can be Freebsd-based?
http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/netmap/


2015-01-27 14:22 GMT-02:00 Hugo Slabbert <hugo at slabnet.com>:

> There is also some work in progress to improve network performance in the
> Linux kernel:
>
> https://lwn.net/Articles/629155/
>
> Preliminary, but encouraging that work is under way.
>
> --
> Hugo
>
>
> On Tue 2015-Jan-27 11:33:16 +0400, Pavel Odintsov <
> pavel.odintsov at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Hello!
>>
>> Looks like somebody want to build Linux soft router!) Nice idea for
>> routing 10-30 GBps. I route about 5+ Gbps in Xeon E5-2620v2 with 4
>> 10GE cards Intel 82599 and Debian Wheezy 3.2 (but it's really terrible
>> kernel, everyone should use modern kernels since 3.16 because "buggy
>> linux route cache"). My current processor load on server is about:
>> 15%, thus I can route about 15 GE on my Linux server.
>>
>> Surely, you should deploy backup server too if master server fails.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 1:53 AM, micah anderson <micah at riseup.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I know that specially programmed ASICs on dedicated hardware like Cisco,
>>> Juniper, etc. are going to always outperform a general purpose server
>>> running gnu/linux, *bsd... but I find the idea of trying to use
>>> proprietary, NSA-backdoored devices difficult to accept, especially when
>>> I don't have the budget for it.
>>>
>>> I've noticed that even with a relatively modern system (supermicro with
>>> a 4 core 1265LV2 CPU, with a 9MB cache, Intel E1G44HTBLK Server
>>> adapters, and 16gig of ram, you still tend to get high percentage of
>>> time working on softirqs on all the CPUs when pps reaches somewhere
>>> around 60-70k, and the traffic approaching 600-900mbit/sec (during a
>>> DDoS, such hardware cannot typically cope).
>>>
>>> It seems like finding hardware more optimized for very high packet per
>>> second counts would be a good thing to do. I just have no idea what is
>>> out there that could meet these goals. I'm unsure if faster CPUs, or
>>> more CPUs is really the problem, or networking cards, or just plain old
>>> fashioned tuning.
>>>
>>> Any ideas or suggestions would be welcome!
>>> micah
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sincerely yours, Pavel Odintsov
>>
>
> --
> Hugo
>



-- 
Eduardo Schoedler



More information about the NANOG mailing list