Hi > Op zo, 02-10-2005 te 14:30 +0200, schreef Michael Bellion: > > > Also, is it not possible to make a B+ tree with the standard iptables? > > > I don't see why it shouldn't be possible. The jump to a new chain can > > > be seen as going deeper into the B+ tree. So it should be possible to > > > construct an iptables table structure that looks very similar to the B+ > > > tree of nf-hipac, for some given rule set. I guess this will be > > > somewhat slower than nf-hipac, but I'd like to see the performance > > > difference... > > > > Sorry, but you seem to confuse some things. > > nf-HiPAC is not based on B+trees or any other kind of B-trees. > > So the algorithm of nf-hipac was changed in view of the one you were > using in 2003? I remembered from your talk then that you used B+trees > and this is confirmed by the slides you've finally put online. The reason why I said that b-trees are not used in hipac was that the b-trees are not the main data structure and are not the main solution of the problem. The problem is solved by a graph that consists of a lot of nodes. During a lookup this graph is traversed and each node that is visited internally uses again a certain data structure. In 2003 btrees were used internally at each node of the graph. In the current implementation simple static binary search is used instead. So basically you can forget about the btrees. They are not important for the solution of the problem. Have a closer look at the slides of the more recent presentations. Best regards Michael Bellion
Attachment:
pgpWaBqmq6oc7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
