From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 28 17:23:54 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82291106566B for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:23:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@eg.sd.rdtc.ru) Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (eg.sd.rdtc.ru [IPv6:2a03:3100:c:13::5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFB3E8FC08 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:23:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pASHM9tD028744; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:22:09 +0700 (NOVT) (envelope-from eugen@eg.sd.rdtc.ru) Received: (from eugen@localhost) by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id pASHM4lo028743; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:22:04 +0700 (NOVT) (envelope-from eugen) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:22:04 +0700 From: Eugene Grosbein To: "Mikhail T." Message-ID: <20111128172204.GA28718@rdtc.ru> References: <201111272043.pARKh9rZ047643@narawntapu.narawntapu> <20111128052758.GA23803@rdtc.ru> <4ED3C114.3070200@aldan.algebra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4ED3C114.3070200@aldan.algebra.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: eivind@dimaga.com, cm@linktel.net, archie@whistle.com, brian@awfulhak.org, suutari@iki.fi, net@freebsd.org, Eugene Grosbein Subject: Re: natd slow, eats up an entire CPU... X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:23:54 -0000 On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:12:52PM -0500, Mikhail T. wrote: > >Do not use natd, use ipfw nat instead - it uses the same libalias > >but completely in kernel and avoids gigantic natd overhead. > I guess, I'll have to research this new method... But I don't recall this > being a problem with FreeBSD-7.x -- are there some known regressions in > natd from 8.x? I do not know since there is no reason in using natd with 8.2-STABLE where it supports nearly all natd's features including multiple NAT instances and shared translation tables. Eugene Grosbein