Re: GSoC: the plan for the project network virtualization

[zhengda]

olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net wrote:
> > Last time on IRC, if I understand it correctly, you said the
> > optimization is to make all packets go through the kernel, and the
> > kernel dispatches the packet with the BPF.
> >     
>
> Not quite. The idea was that if you have a multiplexer sitting directly
> on the kernel interface, it could just upload the rules to the kernel,
> instead of running the BPF implementation itself. But that is only a
> minor additional optimization in a specific situation.
>
> The main idea was that if we have filter translators sitting on a
> multiplexer, the filter rules could be combined with the user-supplied
> rules and all be handled in the multiplexer's BPF implementation, rather
> than actually filtering them twice..
I think it's quite similar as I said before. Maybe I used some words 
that made you confused.
I said the multiplexer (or the hypervisor, I'm not very sensitive to the 
name:-) can have multiple interfaces and there was a "filter" behind 
every interface.
The filter here actually means the BPF implementation (maybe this 
confused you). But I didn't think about who gave the filter rules.
At the beginning, I thought the rules associated with an interface could 
apply to all clients connected to the interface, so the rules might be 
from the user who creates the interface.
But as you said, every client can give its own rules and the rule can be 
from the pfinet server and even the filter translator.

Zheng Da