Performance Consideration #4
-
Hi, Just want to ask if it is possible to consider using VPP instead, using VPP has the added benefit of srv6 MUP (https://docs.fd.io/vpp/23.06/developer/plugins/srv6/mobile_plugin_doc.html?highlight=srv6) plus user plane acceleration as part of it's dataplane features. The only missing piece will be the control-plane that will be translating the PFCP to srv6 configuration in VPP. Also do you think the tun interface is performant? Some throughput tests for Open5gs UPF tun interface could not do more than 1Gbps |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 2 comments
-
As far as I understand, it would be difficult (or even not doable with current GTPU plugin) to translate advanced rules such as SDF Flows.
I already started to integrate SRv6 MUP inside my Free5gc based testbed, and considered using VPP to create endpoints, but since all is not implemented with enough control on SR policies for my usecases (especially
From what I read about tun interfaces, when UERANSIM's dev had tested it, he concluded it depends highly on the test environment. Maybe using gopacket's RawConn would have better performances… Anyway, currently on nextmn/upf my bottleneck is on applying PFCP Rules, and I don't even reach 1Gbps. This implementation would never beat a Linux module anyway: the main goal was only to have an UPF that is easy to modify and to install related to a kernel module. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Thanks @louisroyer, will keep an eye on the updates, project looks very interesting. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
As far as I understand, it would be difficult (or even not doable with current GTPU plugin) to translate advanced rules such as SDF Flows.
I already started to integrate SRv6 MUP inside my Free5gc based testbed, and considered using VPP to create endpoints, but since all is not implemented with enough control on…