Wireblast
v0.6.1 open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on Wireblast's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
Wireblast is an AF_XDPAF_XDPA Linux kernel interface that hands raw packets to a userspace program straight off the network card, skipping the kernel's networking stack. It is how userspace tools reach line rate on 100G links. traffic generator for measuring and replaying high-rate Linux network traffic.
sudo wireblast -i eth1 --mode receive --rx-mode udp-port --rx-port 9000 -d 60s sudo wireblast -i eth1 --dst-ip 2001:db8::1 --packet-size 512 --pps 1M -d 30s sudo wireblast -i eth1 --mode receive --rx-mode keep-management -d 60s sudo wireblast --no-tui -i eth1 --dst-ip 192.0.2.10 --packet-size 512 --pps 1M -d 30s -y sudo wireblast -i eth1 --mode receive --rx-mode udp-port --rx-port 9000 -d 60s cd examples/015-pcap-replay && IFACE=eth1 DST=192.0.2.10 ./run.sh
Summary
Wireblast is an open-source AF_XDP traffic generator for Linux, released under Apache-2.0, built for the point where iperf stops being enough and you need real Ethernet frames at a specific size, thousands of distinct flows, or a captured trace replayed onto the wire. It runs as a single static Go binary with no cgo, libpcap, DPDK, or kernel modules, and you drive it from the command line either through an interactive wizard and live dashboard or, with --no-tui and scriptable flags, in CI and unattended soak tests. It targets network and performance engineers who need to generate or receive traffic patterns—UDPUDPA network protocol that sends individual messages without guaranteeing delivery or order. Applications trade built-in reliability for less overhead and can add their own recovery., TCPTCPA network protocol that delivers a reliable, ordered stream of bytes between two endpoints. It detects lost data and retransmits it. SYN, IMIX, raw Ethernet, VLAN-tagged, PCAPPCAPA packet capture, recorded network packets that can be inspected later. Analysts use it to reconstruct communication and investigate protocol behavior or suspicious traffic. replay—rather than security analysts, and its own README positions it as "the iPerf of packet generators." On a 100G Mellanox NICNICA network interface card or adapter, the hardware that connects a computer to a network. It sends and receives packets over the link. it reaches line rate at every frame size, including 138 million packets per second of minimum-size frames from a single process.
Wireblast is an AF_XDP traffic generator for measuring and replaying high-rate Linux network traffic.
How Wireblast helps
Can this switch actually hold line rate at the frame size my application uses?
drives a real NIC at a chosen packet size and rate and reports the delivered throughput and packet rate, so a claimed line-rate port can be checked frame-size by frame-size rather than assumed
How does this device behave under a realistic internet-like traffic mix rather than one flow of identical packets?
generates IMIX traffic in the standard 7:4:1 size ratio alongside single-pattern UDP or TCP SYN, so a device gets exercised the way production traffic actually shapes it
Does this path forward thousands of simultaneous flows the way my production traffic does, or does it collapse them onto one path?
cycles destinations across a CIDR block and generates up to thousands of distinct flows, then the receive side or downstream ECMP/LAG/RSS hashing shows whether they actually spread out
What does this link or device do when I put yesterday's captured traffic back on the wire?
replays a saved trace file at a controlled rate and reports what went out, turning a one-off capture into a repeatable load test
Is a shared NIC actually receiving everything I think it is, without breaking the connection I'm running it over?
counts arriving packets in a receive mode that can filter to keep the management session intact, and warns if the receive side is bound to fewer queues than the card has so traffic wouldn't be silently missed
Can I fold a traffic-generation check into a CI pipeline or an unattended soak test instead of running it by hand?
runs the same patterns and rates through a plain-text, wizard-free mode that exits with results, so a scripted run produces the same numbers a person watching the dashboard would see
Languages
Command line
No command matches.
| option | found in | since | description |
|---|
Values are placeholders taken from each option’s declared default. Nothing is executed here — the output shown is a recording of a run that already happened.
Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
- Community health
-
Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
-
Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
-
Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
-
Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply
Nine scores for Wireblast, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail Wireblast puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Releases
6 entries
No entries match these filters.
- August 20266
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in atoonk/wireblast, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 2 +2 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 1 +1 joined · −0 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 1 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 100% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close < 1 day first maintainer reply 2.4 hours
- Open backlog 0 of 3 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 0
- Contributors / month 0
- Commits / month 0
- Stars 116
- other 100%
Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.