OpenBSD Journal

Fresh from the hackathon: Faster packets!

Contributed by merdely on from the ive-got-your-10ge-right-here! dept.

Peter N. M. Hansteen writes:

Events page watchers already know this, but dlg@ and henning@ took some time off from the hackathon to give a presentation at the Calgary Unix User Group about networking related news.

The presentation slides (Faster packets: 10GE, faster pf and other fun stuff) are up at http://www.openbsd.org/papers/cuug2007/.

Enjoy!

(Comments are closed)

Comments

  1. By Anonymous Coward (85.201.63.39) on

    On page 6, it is written that other vendors did supply lunix drivers. I think there is a typo, because lunix (http://lng.sourceforge.net/) only runs on C64/c128 and I somehow doubt vendors care about this. :)

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward (122.49.159.108) on

      Don't like the system? Fine. Don't like the code? Fine.
      But I don't understand the reluctance to call Linux by its real name.

      Comments

      1. By Anonymous Coward (85.201.63.39) on

        > Don't like the system? Fine. Don't like the code? Fine.
        > But I don't understand the reluctance to call Linux by its real name.

        While it is very sad to see people still playing the childish game of calling linux leenux or the likes. The point here is that calling linux lunix makes you look really dumb as lunix does actually exist.

        Comments

        1. By Anonymous Coward (24.37.242.64) on

          ...you look really dumb as lunix does actually exist.

          http://lng.sourceforge.net/



        2. By Anonymous Coward (71.138.164.157) on

          ...as opposed to having some rabid fans making stealth 'mod up' sessions to make a serious response to a joke look good?

    2. By Mike Swanson (71.197.194.170) on

      > On page 6, it is written that other vendors did supply lunix drivers. I think there is a typo, because lunix (http://lng.sourceforge.net/) only runs on C64/c128 and I somehow doubt vendors care about this. :)

      Or is it a typo? We all know how important it is to have faster ethernet on your C64 than the machine would actually handle ;)

  2. By Shane J Pearson (59.167.252.29) on 

    more speed!!!
ryan and I are working on some cool stuff
might tell you next year

    Awwwww!!!!! ;-)

  3. By Anonymous Coward (24.122.52.131) on

    According to page 18, "stealth" firewall are useless. I don't suppose there is a way to prevent detection?

    Comments

    1. By henning (80.86.183.227) on

      > According to page 18, "stealth" firewall are useless. I don't suppose there is a way to prevent detection?

      reliably? no.
      and trying to hide it doesn't make sense in the first place.

  4. By Anonymous Coward (71.158.175.143) on

    Based on the Tehuti specs for their PCI-Express 10Gb adapter, that is an 8x (8 lane) PCI-Express server adapter. That is the fastest listing I've seen yet; all the other 10Gb PCI-Express NICs (Netopia, Intel, etc) thus far are only listing their hardware as being 4x (4 lane).

    Does that mean that slotted into a true isolated 8x PCI-Express Bus Slot, the Tehuti adapter makes currently the fastest OpenBSD firewall alive?

    If so, I want one.

Latest Articles

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]