On 30/09/2018, Hans Dedecker wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 12:53 AM Stefan Lippers-Hollmann
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> On 2018-09-29, Torbjorn Jansson wrote:
>> > checkbox for hw offloading shows up for a fraction of a second when page
>> > is
>> > loaded but then it disappears.
>> > so i take it
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 12:53 AM Stefan Lippers-Hollmann wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> On 2018-09-29, Torbjorn Jansson wrote:
> > checkbox for hw offloading shows up for a fraction of a second when page is
> > loaded but then it disappears.
> > so i take it luci removes it dynamically or something at page loa
Hi
On 2018-09-29, Torbjorn Jansson wrote:
> checkbox for hw offloading shows up for a fraction of a second when page is
> loaded but then it disappears.
> so i take it luci removes it dynamically or something at page load.
flow-offloading has only beenbackported to kernel 4.14, if your target
i
> On Sep 29, 2018, at 14:42, Torbjorn Jansson
> wrote:
>
> On 2018-09-29 23:21, Rosen Penev wrote:
>>> On Sep 29, 2018, at 14:14, Torbjorn Jansson
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2018-09-29 21:55, Rosen Penev wrote:
> On Sep 29, 2018, at 12:09, Jérôme Benoit wrote:
>
>> Le 29/09/2018 à
On 2018-09-29 23:21, Rosen Penev wrote:
On Sep 29, 2018, at 14:14, Torbjorn Jansson
wrote:
On 2018-09-29 21:55, Rosen Penev wrote:
On Sep 29, 2018, at 12:09, Jérôme Benoit wrote:
Le 29/09/2018 à 16:56, Felix Fietkau a écrit :
Flow offloading (as implemented in OpenWrt on 4.14) supports
> On Sep 29, 2018, at 14:14, Torbjorn Jansson
> wrote:
>
> On 2018-09-29 21:55, Rosen Penev wrote:
>>> On Sep 29, 2018, at 12:09, Jérôme Benoit wrote:
>>>
Le 29/09/2018 à 16:56, Felix Fietkau a écrit :
Flow offloading (as implemented in OpenWrt on 4.14) supports both
har
On 2018-09-29 21:55, Rosen Penev wrote:
On Sep 29, 2018, at 12:09, Jérôme Benoit wrote:
Le 29/09/2018 à 16:56, Felix Fietkau a écrit :
Flow offloading (as implemented in OpenWrt on 4.14) supports both
hardware offload and generic software offload for routing and NAT.
SFE is not necessary a
> On Sep 29, 2018, at 12:09, Jérôme Benoit wrote:
>
>> Le 29/09/2018 à 16:56, Felix Fietkau a écrit :
>>
>> Flow offloading (as implemented in OpenWrt on 4.14) supports both
>> hardware offload and generic software offload for routing and NAT.
>> SFE is not necessary anymore.
>>
> So you've m
Le 29/09/2018 à 16:56, Felix Fietkau a écrit :
>
> Flow offloading (as implemented in OpenWrt on 4.14) supports both
> hardware offload and generic software offload for routing and NAT.
> SFE is not necessary anymore.
>
So you've made a backport of
https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networkin
On 2018-09-28 15:54, Marko Ratkaj wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 3:14 PM Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>> > They may not be able to push lots of bandwidth, but if you have
>> > <~100Mbps internet they don't need to. If you have >~200Mbps internet
>> > for example with DOCSIS3.1 provider, the
On 2018-09-29 10:53, Jérôme Benoit wrote:
> Le 28/09/2018 à 18:55, Rosen Penev a écrit :
>>
>> So in kernel 4.17 I believe landed flow offloading support. This
>> accomplishes something similar to SFE while being a proper upstream
>> solution. This is already implemented in OpenWrt.
>
> flow off
Le 29/09/2018 à 10:57, Sebastian Moeller a écrit :
>>> So in kernel 4.17 I believe landed flow offloading support. This
>>> accomplishes something similar to SFE while being a proper upstream
>>> solution. This is already implemented in OpenWrt.
>> flow offloading for NAT is different from SFE :
Dear Jérôme,
> On Sep 29, 2018, at 10:53, Jérôme Benoit wrote:
>
> Le 28/09/2018 à 18:55, Rosen Penev a écrit :
>>
>> So in kernel 4.17 I believe landed flow offloading support. This
>> accomplishes something similar to SFE while being a proper upstream
>> solution. This is already implemente
Le 28/09/2018 à 18:55, Rosen Penev a écrit :
>
> So in kernel 4.17 I believe landed flow offloading support. This accomplishes
> something similar to SFE while being a proper upstream solution. This is
> already implemented in OpenWrt.
flow offloading for NAT is different from SFE :
In the firs
> On Sep 28, 2018, at 07:20, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>
>
>>> Is there any work in OpenWRT targeted at integrating Linux forwarding
>>> fastpath in the official build ?
>>> There are out-of-tree patches and builds floating around and nowadays 1
>>> GB/s fiber internet access is very common is deve
Is there any work in OpenWRT targeted at integrating Linux forwarding
fastpath in the official build ?
There are out-of-tree patches and builds floating around and nowadays 1
GB/s fiber internet access is very common is developed countries, and
the router is then becoming the bottleneck in many
Hi all,
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 3:14 PM Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> > They may not be able to push lots of bandwidth, but if you have
> > <~100Mbps internet they don't need to. If you have >~200Mbps internet
> > for example with DOCSIS3.1 provider, then you probably need a newer
> > dual-core device t
Hello,
They may not be able to push lots of bandwidth, but if you have
<~100Mbps internet they don't need to. If you have >~200Mbps internet
for example with DOCSIS3.1 provider, then you probably need a newer
dual-core device to take advantage of it.
Is there any work in OpenWRT targeted at
On 28/09/2018 06:35, Eric Luehrsen wrote:
On 09/27/2018 04:22 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
On 09/26/2018 09:38 AM, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
On 2018-09-23 00:42, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
Hi,
We talked about plans for the next OpenWrt releases in this mail
thread:
http://lists.infradead.org/piperm
On 09/27/2018 04:22 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
On 09/26/2018 09:38 AM, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
On 2018-09-23 00:42, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
Hi,
We talked about plans for the next OpenWrt releases in this mail thread:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-adm/2018-July/000849.html
This mai
On 09/26/2018 09:38 AM, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
>
>
> On 2018-09-23 00:42, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We talked about plans for the next OpenWrt releases in this mail thread:
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-adm/2018-July/000849.html
>> This mail is more or less a summary of
Koen Vandeputte schrieb am 26.09.2018 um 09:38:
> These targets were also dropped in 18.06 branch.
> Maybe we should also consider dropping support for these targets in master?
>
>
> adm5120
I started working on this target last year, but had to focus on other
topics meanwhile. Still, I would
On 2018-09-23 00:42, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
Hi,
We talked about plans for the next OpenWrt releases in this mail thread:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-adm/2018-July/000849.html
This mail is more or less a summary of the conclusions, this is still
open for change especially the d
> On Sep 22, 2018, at 4:42 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
>
> Signed PGP part
> Hi,
>
> We talked about plans for the next OpenWrt releases in this mail thread:
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-adm/2018-July/000849.html
> This mail is more or less a summary of the conclusions, this is
On 09/23/2018 08:20 PM, Rosen Penev wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 3:43 PM Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We talked about plans for the next OpenWrt releases in this mail thread:
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-adm/2018-July/000849.html
>> This mail is more or less a summa
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 3:43 PM Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We talked about plans for the next OpenWrt releases in this mail thread:
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-adm/2018-July/000849.html
> This mail is more or less a summary of the conclusions, this is still
> open for cha
26 matches
Mail list logo
