From owner-freebsd-net Tue Jul 3 21:25:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from smtp1.sentex.ca (smtp1.sentex.ca [199.212.134.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5681337B403 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:25:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from chimp.simianscience.com (cage.simianscience.com [64.7.134.1]) by smtp1.sentex.ca (8.11.2/8.11.1) with SMTP id f644PNY12026; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 00:25:23 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) From: Mike Tancsa To: bjf@samurai.com (Bryan Fullerton) Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PPPoE latency Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 00:25:22 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20010702233606.A84523@sneakerz.org> <20010702235434.B84523@sneakerz.org> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org 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