[SunRescue] Re: Help!

[Peter L. Wargo]

That's why the Xrouter is cool, it does PPPoE as well.  Thankfully, I
don't need it.

-Pete

-----
Peter L. Wargo
pwargo at basenji.com
Owner/operator of basenji.com.

On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Sebastian Marius Kirsch wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 03:15:18PM +0100, Paul Sladen wrote:
> > > You also can't get enough performance out of a 486 any more for anything
> > > more than a dial-up connection anyway, particularly if you want to do
> > > any serious amount of IP filtering, NAT, etc.  I ran my cable modem
> [...]
> > a) biggest load on my 486sx25 router is starting up the perl script to
> >    update the dynamic DNS
> 
> In my experience, for home users the problem is not routing per se, but
> the PPPoE protocol some of us unfortunate DSL subscribers are stuck
> with. The rp-pppoe daemon can easily bring a 486DX or a sun4c SPARC to
> its knees. (My IPX with powerup won't do more then 50KB/sec over my
> 768kbps DSL line.) I don't know how that thing manages to suck up so
> much power, but it does; and it's not only user time either -- according
> to top, it's about 1/3 user time and 2/3 system time. (The pppoed runs
> in user space, but uses bpf.) What's really curious about this is that
> switching the normal 40MHz processor with a 80MHz powerup didn't change
> anything -- throughput is still stuck at 50KB/s.
> 
> But NetBSD is getting in-kernel PPPoE now, so this will probably get
> better soon. (You should be able to synchronous PPP with in-kernel PPPoE
> too -- with the rp-pppoe package, you can only do asynchronous PPP,
> which sucks up even more time.)
> 
> -- 
> Yours, Sebastian Kirsch <skirsch at moebius.inka.de>
> 
> Mathematics deals exclusively with the relations of concepts
> to each other without consideration of their relation to experience.
> _______________________________________________
> rescue maillist  -  rescue at sunhelp.org
> http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue
>