From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 8 18:06:26 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1B1437B40F for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2003 18:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bragi.housing.ufl.edu (bragi.housing.ufl.edu [128.227.47.18]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C79743F3F for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2003 18:06:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from WillS@housing.ufl.edu) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 21:06:24 -0400 Message-ID: <0E972CEE334BFE4291CD07E056C76ED8DB2F84@bragi.housing.ufl.edu> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: NAT and MTU Thread-Index: AcNFs1H9epalp9knTLiUsLtrqVVnQgAAsRyA From: "Will Saxon" To: "Brent Wiese" , Subject: RE: NAT and MTU X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 01:06:26 -0000 > -----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