From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 15 12:52:13 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 225128FF for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (glebius.int.ru [81.19.69.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70F1110F3 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:52:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s0FCptTT032714 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:51:55 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id s0FCpttn032713; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:51:55 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cell.glebius.int.ru: glebius set sender to glebius@FreeBSD.org using -f Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:51:55 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: Dennis Yusupoff Subject: Re: FreeBSD network optimization project Message-ID: <20140115125155.GN26504@FreeBSD.org> References: <52D637E0.8070603@smartspb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52D637E0.8070603@smartspb.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:52:13 -0000 On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 11:25:20AM +0400, Dennis Yusupoff wrote: D> Vitalii, I would be very appreciate if you will publish anywere your D> current production results and future experience. D> And I agree with you in NAT problem. By the way, while pf NAT is the D> best of the all available (in terms of speed, convenience and easy D> management), it has a huge lack - needs in external FTP helper D> (ftp-proxy) and event that doesn't work 100% correctly. I won't call that HUGE lack. Most bulk traffic nowdays is either HTTP or p2p. FTP is dying (and that's good). -- Totus tuus, Glebius.