Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 00:25:22 -0400 From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> To: bjf@samurai.com (Bryan Fullerton) Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PPPoE latency Message-ID: <se65kt8aa3ph960q1lufjqfnaqkg4s82f2@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <SEN.994137137.444294559@news.sentex.net> References: <f05101003b766f52ce823@[192.168.1.34]> <20010702233606.A84523@sneakerz.org> <f05101001b766fe1f011f@[192.168.1.34]> <20010702235434.B84523@sneakerz.org> <SEN.994137137.444294559@news.sentex.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3 Jul 2001 01:12:18 -0400, in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you wrote: >> >>Same difference, ppp is implemented as a userland process, nearly the >>same amount of work must be done for either natd or ppp. > >Well, I certainly can't get around needing NAT. Would it really add=20 On my 486 gateway, I found using ipnat made a big difference in overall throughput for my machines behind the DSL box. With a faster CPU, the differences become much less measurable. ---Mike Mike Tancsa (mdtancsa@sentex.net) =09 Sentex Communications Corp, =09 Waterloo, Ontario, Canada "Given enough time, 100 monkeys on 100 routers=20 could setup a national IP network." (KDW2) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?se65kt8aa3ph960q1lufjqfnaqkg4s82f2>