Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:40:10 -0500 From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> To: David Wolfskill <dhw@whistle.com>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipnat vs natd and ipf vs ipfw (fwd) Message-ID: <5.0.1.4.0.20010129123814.03768a90@marble.sentex.ca> In-Reply-To: <200101291735.f0THZaf84267@pau-amma.whistle.com> References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010129121235.037a5ec0@marble.sentex.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 09:35 AM 1/29/01 -0800, David Wolfskill wrote:
> >Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:15:25 -0500
> >From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
>
> >>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.
>
> >Perhaps it was due to some interaction with natd and PPPoE. Not sure. From
> >the machine itself, I could get full rate throughput on all applications.
> >It was only from the machines behind the FreeBSD box where I would notice a
> >significant speed drop when using NAT. Going through squid, or even socks5
> >was/is quick-- only with nat would I see the speed drop (e.g. downloading
> >binary attachments from my news server). But as soon as I switched to
> >ipnat, the speed was at expected levels from all my home workstations on
> >all services.
>
>Well, I do have a static IP address (good thing for running nameservers,
>eh?). Other than that, I don't see anything obviously so different in
>configuration that might indicate the difference in behavior.
Me too as the ISP is me :-) The only other thing I can think of is that
the MTU on my internal machines is not 1500 to get around and problematic
P-MTU issues.
---Mike
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?5.0.1.4.0.20010129123814.03768a90>