--/i8j2F0k9BYX4qLc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At the last San Diego BSD users group meeting we had an interesting=20
discussion about which would be a better pf platform: FreeBSD or OpenBSD.=
=20
The choices were OpenBSD 4.2 with the updated pf (supposedly lots of=20
performance improvements) or FreeBSD 5.3 I think it was. The perceived=20
disadvantage of FreeBSD was a slightly older pf (shouldn't be hard to fix)=
=20
and the advantage would be the ability to use more than one core. You=20
can't really buy UP Intel chips anymore (well, you can buy Celerons, but=20
why not just get a Core 2 Duo), and Core 2 Quad isn't that much more.

The target setup involves three NICs. One to the outside, one to the=20
inside, and one to the failover box.

So that leads me to two questions for these lists.

1) How would you design a router to make use of multiple cores. We've=20
talked about different multi-core setups for running the TCP stack on one=
=20
core and IP on another and so on to sustain 10 GigE TCP connections. But=20
this case is different in that all we're doing is NAT and forwarding.

2) How well do we think existing code (FreeBSD, so I can tell the folks=20
next month, and NetBSD) will do in this case?

Take care,

Bill

--/i8j2F0k9BYX4qLc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFHLN8fWz+3JHUci9cRAqPaAJ0bWfswH/asajxazrusluhsV2+wjgCeM014
XW9Zh98ZKz+OA/FBsPlGgSw=
=z/f2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--/i8j2F0k9BYX4qLc--