I've no idea what you're talking about here, Alex. Please elaborate? It's software and free for personal/lab use?
I missed the "free for personal use" which is silly as I'm sure I knew that from when they launched the product. So I ended up looking at the price and voicing my thoughts on that and how as efficient as it may be, is it really power efficient enough to replace custom ASIC hardware? I think of all the people on the forum you're probably the only one in a position to evaluate this. However it did completely sidetrack me from your actual question for which I apologise.
I just can't get my head around where this product fits in a world that is supposed to be focused on reducing energy use, which generally involves bespoke silicon for heavy workloads. But then custom silicon does potentially lead to e-waste once its no longer fast enough to be useful, whereas general purpose remain useful for far longer even if just to flog on eBay.
This page seems a lot more useful, which suggests to me that things like geoblocking, pfBlockerRG like functionality, would have to be done manually using a another box to implement using the remote management. I guess this makes sense for an edge router, its focused on its one job of moving packets as efficiently as possible.
Oh this is interesting too:
https://www.netgate.com/resources/articles-vector-packet-processingI think I understand now where Netgate are coming from, the one reason why to use FreeBSD for pfSense was the kernel packet processing was superior to Linux. Its a win win for them to create TSNR as they get the driver support of Linux and a vastly superior packet processing ability now with VPP.
It begs the question, why isn't OpenWRT adopting VPP? I'd imagine this would be a game changer for using older routers which weren't capable of doing NAT at Gigabit speeds to actually be able to do so. Not enough NAND space perhaps? I mean surely VPP could also be an advantage for handling WiFi AP bridging?
