On Monday 12 June 2006 02:57 pm, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: > Vadim Goncharov wrote: > > I hope that my explanation was helpful enough to understand :) > > Also, if you will be using 7.0, include BPF_JITTER in your kernel > > config as this will enable native code-compiling for bpf and > > ng_bpf - this will speed things up. > > Am I the only one, that thinks BPF_JITTER is a stupid name? It > suggest you add or enable jitter for the packet flow. No one wants > jitter! It sucks. Why isn't it called simply BPF_JIT? Everyone > knows what JIT stands for, JITTER on the other hand is to be > avoided. I am the guilty one and I hate the name myself. :-) This feature was imported from WinPcap: http://www.winpcap.org/docs/docs31/html/group__NPF__code.html#ga33 I didn't want another name for the same thing. Jung-uk KimReceived on Mon Jun 12 2006 - 18:21:10 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:57 UTC