From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 7 11:11:12 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66E7437B401 for ; Wed, 7 May 2003 11:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from perrin.int.nxad.com (internal.ext.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E0BF43F85 for ; Wed, 7 May 2003 11:11:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sean@perrin.int.nxad.com) Received: by perrin.int.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6B73520F00; Wed, 7 May 2003 11:11:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 11:11:10 -0700 From: Sean Chittenden To: Clement Laforet Message-ID: <20030507181110.GN49916@perrin.int.nxad.com> References: <3EB67822.3070802@centtech.com> <20030505182756.093fb1c3.sheep.killer@cultdeadsheep.org> <3EB6A0BF.1040803@centtech.com> <20030506042044.GA84589@c7.campus.utcluj.ro> <3EB922B7.2080002@centtech.com> <20030507170155.GA13015@c7.campus.utcluj.ro> <20030507193247.6f60584f.sheep.killer@cultdeadsheep.org> <3EB94516.5070503@centtech.com> <20030507195557.6554155b.sheep.killer@cultdeadsheep.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030507195557.6554155b.sheep.killer@cultdeadsheep.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org cc: Eric Anderson Subject: Re: NAT performance tweaks X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 18:11:12 -0000 > > Well, why not make it a /boot/loader.conf settable sysctl, so > > while the system is running, it is "read only", and only settable > > on boot. > > > > Is there a flaw in that thinking? > > It should be great and easily maintainable for sys admins. But I > don't know ipfilter maintainer's point of view :) At this point, given configuration bits/cold facts have been exchanged regarding what are good settings in ip_nat.h, can we please consider this thread dead? If someone would like to send Darren a patch or an email asking him if'd be interested in making some of the ip_nat.h values into sysctl's, that'd be dandy, however I just assume not see this thread wind on about easier configuration of ipfilter and friends. Performance != making sysadmin life easier. -sc -- Sean Chittenden