Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 11 Feb 2002 16:30:15 -0500
From:      Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net>
To:        Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
Cc:        freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: squeeze more performance out of natd?
Message-ID:  <20020211213015.GO90229@overlord.e-gerbil.net>
In-Reply-To: <20020211112645.F63886@elvis.mu.org>
References:  <MPENKFCCIIDAJKJJOLBHOEAHCIAA.tariq@inty.net> <20020211130512.S84750-100000@patrocles.silby.com> <20020211112645.F63886@elvis.mu.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 11:26:45AM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:

> failing that, there's always moving it into the kernel where the perf
> would most likely get better by several orders of magnitude by avoiding
> copies and userspace/kernel context switching.

Of course copying the entire packet in and out for nat is very stupid. But
in theory, keeping the decision making in userland would allow for easier
implementation of more powerful nat tools (ex: per-flow nat load balancing,
etc). Perhaps it would be more useful to retain some userland part, but
only pass the layer 3/4 headers around. Or perhaps it should be entirely 
kernel based for simple NAT, but with a hook for a userland program that 
could snarf the headers and make decisions if needed/wanted.

-- 
Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net>       http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177  (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA  B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020211213015.GO90229>