From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Oct 11 05:22:24 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA21695 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 05:22:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gromit.eu.org (diac-gw.cgu.nl [145.101.220.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA21688 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 05:22:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from P.Dekkers@gromit.eu.org) Received: (from paul@localhost) by gromit.eu.org (8.8.7/8.8.7/psd) id OAA00463; Sun, 11 Oct 1998 14:24:19 +0200 Message-ID: <19981011142419.B384@gromit.eu.org> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 14:24:19 +0200 From: Paul Dekkers To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: NAT vs. MASQUERADING (e.g. FBSD vs. Linux) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.91.1 Organization: Me and organized? Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi We now have 2 Linux machine's to do the IP routing, because I always thought that MASQUERADING under Linux is much better, and besides, firewall rules under FreeBSD are slower. Is there anybody with some performance tests done, so that he can say I'm right or not? I've tested once nat with just loopback and it seemed a lot slower. I have to reinstall both machine's this week because of an network upgrade, so it would be now or never I think :-) Paul P.S. What about the maximum of network connections? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message