nanog mailing list archives
Re: uPRF strict more
From: Anoop Ghanwani <anoop () alumni duke edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 14:36:13 -0700
This is not true for all ASICs. Some ASICs choose to incur the penalty in a different way, e.g., by halving the prefix tables. The prefix table is then duplicated so that uRPF SA and forwarding DA lookups can happen in parallel. What kind of penalty is incurred is a question worth asking the equipment vendor. On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 1:10 PM Jean St-Laurent via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> wrote:
Thanks a lot for sharing. So 100 Gbps at line rate with 80B frames is about ~150 Mpps. 100 Gbps at line rate with 208B frames is about ~60 Mpps. It's a significant penalty. Jean -----Original Message----- From: brad dreisbach <bradd () us ntt net> Sent: September 29, 2021 3:33 PM To: Jean St-Laurent <jean () ddostest me> Cc: 'brad dreisbach' <bradd () us ntt net>; 'Phil Bedard' < bedard.phil () gmail com>; 'North American Network Operators' Group' < nanog () nanog org> Subject: Re: uPRF strict more On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 02:54:43PM -0400, Jean St-Laurent wrote:Hi Brad, I'd be interested to hear more about this pps penalty. Do we talk about5% penalty or something closer to 50%?Let me know if you still have some numbers close to you related to PPSwith uRPF loose. iirc, strict vs loose doesnt matter, its still an extra lookup which effects the performance. i was able to find some numbers to give an example. the 4x100G tomahawk card was able to pass min frame size(which iirc on ixia is 80B) at line rate with no features enabled. turn on uRPF and it is only able to pass 208B frames at line rate. similar results were seen with several generations of cisco and juniper line cards(if i tested nokia i cant recall, we had stopped doing urpf when they were introduced into the network). -b
Current thread:
- Re: uPRF strict more, (continued)
- Re: uPRF strict more Blake Hudson (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more Sabri Berisha (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more Blake Hudson (Sep 30)
- Re: uPRF strict more Adam Thompson (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more Phil Bedard (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more brad dreisbach (Sep 29)
- RE: uPRF strict more Jean St-Laurent via NANOG (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more brad dreisbach (Sep 29)
- RE: uPRF strict more Jean St-Laurent via NANOG (Sep 29)
- Message not available
- RE: uPRF strict more Jean St-Laurent via NANOG (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more Anoop Ghanwani (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more Mark Tinka (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more Baldur Norddahl (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more brad dreisbach (Sep 29)
- Re: uPRF strict more Mark Tinka (Sep 29)
- Re: [External] Re: uPRF strict more Hunter Fuller via NANOG (Sep 30)
- Re: [External] Re: uPRF strict more Mark Tinka (Sep 30)
- Re: [External] Re: uPRF strict more Valdis Klētnieks (Sep 30)
- Re: [External] Re: uPRF strict more Mark Tinka (Sep 30)
- Re: [External] Re: uPRF strict more Andrew Smith (Sep 30)
- Re: [External] Re: uPRF strict more Sabri Berisha (Sep 30)