Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:16:56 -0800 (PST) From: David Wolfskill <dhw@whistle.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ipnat vs natd and ipf vs ipfw (fwd) Message-ID: <200101291716.f0THGu584049@pau-amma.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20010127225302.01e75660@marble.sentex.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 22:54:20 -0500 >From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> >At 07:20 PM 1/27/2001 -0500, Espen Oyslebo wrote: >>Currently, I have ipfw and natd doing their job fairly well. Is there any >>point in switching (yeah,yeah, don't fix it if it ain't broken). >Actually, I have found ipnat to be *much* faster for my home DSL >connection. My gateway is a lowly Pentium 133 and I can only get full rate >net throughput use ipnat. natd is about 33% slower than ipnat for my setup >on PPPoE. Curious. My home firewall is (still) running FreeBSD 3.2-R; and it's a P-120 with 16 MB memory... yet I was able to FTP a good-sized (>1 MB) file from ftp.freebsd.org at >150 FB/s. And I'm using ipfw & natd. So far, I have been unable to attribute any degradation of the link to the firewall, except when its disk drive crashed. (My firewall box also does the external view of DNS for the outside world, as well as slave DNS for a handful of other domains, and sendmail.) Cheers, david -- David Wolfskill dhw@whistle.com UNIX System Administrator Desk: 650/577-7158 TIE: 8/499-7158 Cell: 650/759-0823 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200101291716.f0THGu584049>