1200 was my average packet size when analyzed in Dataguard Core network (a smb ISP here in .no) . Im sure others can find different averages. My point is just that if you have normal traffic patterns, even at 600 you should have no problem pushing 10GE. A MTU of 600 should give you about 53 gigabit/s if you are able yo push 12000000 pps with that payload. Your statement of 80% is just confusing, that is all.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017, 04:02 Jim Thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday, January 26, 2017, Espen Johansen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Are you saying worst case is 80%? Its not normal to have all minimum size > > packets unless you are under ddos. > > Default ethernet is 1526 (1530 with vlan) with a MTU 1500 on a layer 1 > > frame. > > A layer 2 frame is 1518 (1522 with vlan). > > If you want to include all layer headers then 1542 including vlan is the > > correct number and that will allow a 1500 octet payload. > > > Yes, I know, but adding a vlan tag means the small frame size isn't > "smallest". I was just throwing that in for comparison. > > Point is, on a 10g network, the maximum frame rate is 14.88 mpps. This is > the highest rate required by the network under any circumstance. It's also > how you have to think about the problem if you're not going to engage in > making excuses. > > If you still don't like it, consider that: > > - 40g Ethernet cards exist today, so being able to forward 256 byte packets > at 40gbps will require the same 14.88 mpps rate, > - nx25 is the future in the data center vswitches and vrouters are a thing, > and pfSense should be able to play in this market > - 10g is starting to appear on lower-end hardware. > - 10g switches are starting to hit $100/port > > And also that netgate has product coming in 2017 that folds multiple > integrated switch ports into a single 2.5gbps or multiple 10gbps Ethernet > uplink ports. > > Remember, we're doing this in software. No ASICs required. That 12mpps > figure on an 8 core Rangeley includes 50 ACLs in the path. > > BTW, average frame size on the Internet is just under 600 bytes, btw. Not > 1200 as you guessed. > > Jim > > > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017, 18:20 Jim Thompson <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> > > wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 26, 2017, at 5:06 PM, [email protected] <javascript:;> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Am 2017-01-26 07:03, schrieb Jim Thompson: > > > >> It does not. > > > >> The c2758 SoC is interesting. 8 cores, and the on-die i354 is > > > essentially a > > > >> block with 4 i350s on it. > > > >> These have 8 queues for each of rx and tx, so 16 each, for a total > of > > 64 > > > >> queues. > > > >> On the c2xxx series (and other) boxes we ship, we increase certain > > > >> tunables, because we know what we're installing onto, and can adjust > > > that > > > >> factory load. pfSense CE does not have that luxury, it has to run on > > > nearly > > > >> anything the community finds to run it on. Some of these systems > have > > > ... > > > >> constrained RAM. While we test each release on every model we ship, > > > such > > > >> testing takes place only for a handful of other configurations. > > > >> There is a decent explanation of some of the tunables here: > > > >> https://wiki.freebsd.org/NetworkPerformanceTuning > > > >> Incidentally, FreeBSD, and thus pfSense can't take much advantage of > > > those > > > >> multqueue NICs, because the forwarding path doesn't have the > architure > > > to > > > >> advantage them. Our DPDK-based system can forward l3 frames at over > > > 12Mpps > > > >> on this hardware (about 80% of line-rate on a 10g interface). > > > >> Neither pfSense or FreeBSD (nor Linux) will do 1/10th of this rate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, is this DPDK-based system commercially available? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > Still being developed. > > > > > > Jim > > > _______________________________________________ > > > pfSense mailing list > > > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > pfSense mailing list > > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold > > > _______________________________________________ > pfSense mailing list > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold > _______________________________________________ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
