Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 21:06:24 -0400 From: "Will Saxon" <WillS@housing.ufl.edu> To: "Brent Wiese" <brently@bjwcs.com>, <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: NAT and MTU Message-ID: <0E972CEE334BFE4291CD07E056C76ED8DB2F84@bragi.housing.ufl.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -----Original Message----- > From: Brent Wiese [mailto:brently@bjwcs.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 8:45 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: NAT and MTU >=20 >=20 > I have a machine that is being double-NAT'd. >=20 > Would it make sense to set the MTU lower to account for the=20 > NAT overhead? >=20 > It makes sense to me as I know MTU, but I like to check in=20 > case my thinking > isn't right. :) Why would it matter? Does NAT increase the overall datagram size? I = thought it just changed addresses and stored connection information in a = table somewhere. If this is the case, just having NAT, even 2x, isn't = going to make it any more likely that your traffic will fragment. -Will
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0E972CEE334BFE4291CD07E056C76ED8DB2F84>