Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 18:24:06 +0200 From: Paolo Pisati <p.pisati@oltrelinux.com> To: Iasen Kostov <tbyte@otel.net> Cc: FreeBSD_Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [6.x patchset] Ipfw nat and libalias modules Message-ID: <20060502162406.GA3596@tin.it> In-Reply-To: <1146569915.79123.9.camel@DraGoN.OTEL.net> References: <20060430135702.GA48117@tin.it> <1146569915.79123.9.camel@DraGoN.OTEL.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 02:38:35PM +0300, Iasen Kostov wrote: > Have you done any performace comparisons with pf's NAT ? I realy would > prefer libalias based kernel NAT than pf because libalias works better > with ftp, irc dcc and things like that (VoIP would be nice too :P ). So > the only reason I've not put it in production is because its to new and > untested but as soon as I upgrade mine home to 6.x router I'll test it > more extensivly. no performance comparison (at least not yet), but i don't expect NAT to be a real bottleneck. Anyway, if we find it's dead slow, i'll fix it :) > Btw what is the status of the multi-session to the same > point PPTP NAT (e.g call ID tracking) ? i didn't modify the protocol specific nat support, so it's just like with natd. btw a brave guy (Hi Patrick! :) switched 4 boxes (i386 and amd64, UP and SMP) from natd to ipfw's nat and everything went smooth, except for a little bug that i'm tracking down... sounds good to me! :) bye -- Paolo "le influenze esterne sono troppe, il mondo reale non e' mica quello fatato dei komunisti :-p" - Anonymous Lumbard
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060502162406.GA3596>