From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 529EF1F3 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:35:48 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1292; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1379392587; x=1380602187; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=1yXkMP8MgbqOLR8gLiSMaaPkZKTEnDxfOgKWYthonts=; b=i+XnBy3qCurPaY+xP3ly/q8v5uZzujwxqBwq16XTrjAxVmRL3MHrJisr fZdnHP3+lxVYMg/VMhuLb4onRk0bmbDk33BuPFcAgIgU54uc6FU4eBE7G mTYW+cm+jSJ3QbY2ANyp5S+CyUuLO/MUTvUeypc0r27QRiwTo8Q7V1KYg g=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiAFAEzbN1KtJV2c/2dsb2JhbABagwc4UsEKgSEWdIInAQQ6ORgBCCIUQiUCBAESCId7uwmNFIEKgRg4gx6BAAOUH4ULkEWDJIFxOQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,920,1371081600"; d="scan'208";a="260642275" Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Sep 2013 04:36:25 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com [173.37.183.76]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r8H4aPbU023043 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:36:25 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x07.cisco.com ([169.254.2.36]) by xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com ([173.37.183.76]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 23:36:25 -0500 From: "Sujith Sankar (ssujith)" To: Vincent JARDIN , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Re: TCP/IP stack - options Thread-Index: AQHOsxu0PTHnEcvr6UqofR+i/UeU+ZnKCLqA Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:36:24 +0000 Message-ID: <9C4CB4066E545D4D9D728B3238E19CA501496A96@xmb-aln-x07.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <52376A89.4000504@6wind.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.4.130416 x-originating-ip: [173.39.24.126] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <19389211F1712F45900BA2C165E81142@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] TCP/IP stack - options X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:35:48 -0000 Hi Vincent, Sincere thanks to you for the email ! This is very helpful. I think I'll go with Rump kernel stack to start with, and might think about the other options later. Regards, -Sujith On 17/09/13 2:01 AM, "Vincent JARDIN" wrote: >Hi Sujith, > >NetBSD/Rump is the only open source TCP/IP stack for DPDK. Some people >may have tried to port LwIP too. As far as we know, only 6WIND has a >robust and fully compliant stack which provides socket APIs to the >applications on top of the DPDK. I'd be pleased to get a list of options >for the DPDK too: > - Rump/NetBSD thanks to Antti > - maybe LwIP TBC > - 6WINDGate's fast path TCP/IP stack >and to list them on dpdk.org. > >My 2 cents, > Vincent > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm new to DPDK and this group. >> >> In order to try out some of my applications on DPDK, I'd like to know a >> little bit about the options that are there for protocol processing. >> Could someone give info about the TCP/IP stacks that could be used with >> DPDK libraries and applications? Quick googling gave a few names >>(6Wind, >> rump kernel tcp/ip stack, etc). But some wise words from the group >>could >> go a long way in helping me out. >> >> Thanks in advance ! >> -Sujith > >