LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: FreeS/WAN Cluster - any experiences?

To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: FreeS/WAN Cluster - any experiences?
From: Roberto Nibali <ratz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 22:32:03 +0100
Hi,

Some examples using this estimation method:
Type:    T3 or E3
MBit/s:  45
Estimate
Mbit*25: 1125 MHz
Minimum IPSEC gateway: 1200
Minimum with other load (e.g. firewall): 1500+
--------------------
So a 2GHz Machine should en/decrypt something like 50MBit - a dual

This is the upper limit and only valable if your machine does nothing else ;) I reckon you would like to log the stuff too, but your scheduler will never give your user space process any time to run? Sure, you get 50Mbit/s but can't log anymore nor can you login in a reasonable timeframe to fix the damn thing if it stands somewhere in a data center in the middle of nowhere. Now, assume you have more then one NIC and you might get into interrupt mitigation problems, early drow because of receive queue saturation and another IRQ related thing -> 5Mbit drop dead. To make the whole story really interesting, let's assume you put 2000 iptables entries onto your packetfilter and -> you're down at 25Mbit/s. It's real, it's in my lab and I don't like it :)
And as I understand their calculations, it's 50Mbit/s with MTU packets.

Xeon's help but are bloody expensive.

machine a little bit more (I know it's not multithreaded, but firewalling etc could be done on the other CPU). So we have 5 megabytes/sec.

SMP not necessarily does a speed up. Only when you have per CPU L1 and L2 cache. If this is not the case, you have a L1 refill/flush problem. I'm currently working on a benchmark test which seems to clearly reflect such problems. I just blindly draw the conclusion that for IPsec it must be equivalent.

One Machine would spoil the scalability.

What do you mean by that?

Cheers,
Roberto Nibali, ratz



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>