On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 01:43:18PM +0100, {Pedro Lucas-Suporte Netcount} wrote:
> I'm also using the packet API instead of pcap. The reason for Jens might be
> (for me it is) performance. The more API layers it has to go through, the
> slower the code. This is critical for low usage CPU (background)
> applications that must capture live traffic, with repetitive calls to e.g.
> PacketReceivePacket( ).What are the measured performance differences between code using the packet API and code using pcap? Perhaps the performance difference can be reduced - either with implementation changes or with libpcap API changes - to the extent that using the raw packet API (or, on various UN*Xes, the raw BPF API, or the raw PF_PACKET API, or the raw DLPI API, or the raw DAG API, or...) doesn't make a difference for all but *very* few applications (if any). ================================================================== This is the WinPcap users list. It is archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To unsubscribe use mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ==================================================================
