OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
undeadly.org
OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
1–10 of 74 posts
Re: OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
#2"Values up to 999G are supported, more than enough for interfaces today and the future." - Article
"When we set the upper limit of PC-DOS at 640K, we thought nobody would ever need that much memory." - Bill Gates
Re: OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
#3"Values up to 999G are supported, more than enough for interfaces today and the future." - Article "When we set the upper limit of PC-DOS at 640K, we thought nobody would ever need that much memory." - Bill Gates
Honestly, I'm really curious about this number. 10bits is 1024, so why 999G specifically?
Re: OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
#4[dead]
Re: OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
#5"Values up to 999G are supported, more than enough for interfaces today and the future." - Article "When we set the upper limit of PC-DOS at 640K, we thought nobody would ever need that much memory." - Bill Gates
> "Values up to 999G are supported, more than enough for interfaces today and the future." - Article
Especially given that IEEE 802.3dj is working on 1.6T / 1600G, and is expected to publish the final spec in Summer/Autumn 2026:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terabit_Ethernet
Currently these interfaces are only on switches, but there are already NICs at 800G (P1800GO, Thor Ultra, ConnectX-8/9), so if you LACP/LAGG two together your bond is at 1600G.
Re: OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
#6"Values up to 999G are supported, more than enough for interfaces today and the future." - Article "When we set the upper limit of PC-DOS at 640K, we thought nobody would ever need that much memory." - Bill Gates
Honestly, I'm really curious about this number. 10bits is 1024, so why 999G specifically?
Looks like an arbitrary validation cap. By the time we're maxing out the 64-bit underlying representation we probably won't be using Ethernet any more.
Re: OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
#7"Values up to 999G are supported, more than enough for interfaces today and the future." - Article "When we set the upper limit of PC-DOS at 640K, we thought nobody would ever need that much memory." - Bill Gates
Honestly, I'm really curious about this number. 10bits is 1024, so why 999G specifically?
Looking at the patch itself (linked in the article), the description has this:
> We now support configuring bandwidth up to ~1 Tbps (overflow in m2sm at m > 2^40).
So I think that's it, 2^40 is ~1.099 trillion
Re: OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, I'm really curious about this number. 10bits is 1024, so why 999G specifically?
Looks like an arbitrary validation cap. By the time we're maxing out the 64-bit underlying representation we probably won't be using Ethernet any more.
> By the time we're maxing out the 64-bit underlying representation we probably won't be using Ethernet any more.
We will be using Ethernet until the heat death of the universe, if we survive that long.
Re: OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
#9Can pf actually shape at speeds above 4 gbps?
Re: OpenBSD: PF queues break the 4 Gbps barrier
#10[dead]