Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 16:58:58 -0000 From: "Brian Somers" <brian@utell.co.uk> To: "Charles Mott" <cmott@srv.net> Cc: "Julian Elischer" <julian@whistle.com>, "Eivind Eklund" <eivind@dimaga.com>, "Brian Somers" <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>, "Ari Suutari" <ari.suutari@ps.carel.fi>, <hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Single socket version of natd Message-ID: <199702041659.QAA00486@ui-gate.utell.co.uk>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
That's a good point.
If we leave it in both ppp & natd, can we add a (third) arg to
PacketAlias{In,Out}() that tells it not to do anything with the
ip_sum ? If it's reading raw packets from a wire (with ppp),
the sum may be wrong (this has been discussed before) and
we want to leave incorrect the sum alone, but with natd, it's a
terrible waste to have the kernel code zero the sum, have natd
re-calculate it, have PacketAliasIn() check it, and then probably
re-calculate it again (if anything's changed).
With a "leave the sum alone option", natd could pass the packet
with the zero'd ip_sum to PacketAliasIn() and know that it has
to calculate it itself afterwards....
Cheers.
Brian <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> <brian@freebsd.org> <brian@utell.co.uk>
<http://www.awfulhak.demon.co.uk>;
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour
----------
> From: Charles Mott <cmott@srv.net>
> To: Brian Somers <brian@utell.co.uk>
> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>; Eivind Eklund
<eivind@dimaga.com>; Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>; Ari Suutari
<ari.suutari@ps.carel.fi>; hackers@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Single socket version of natd
> Date: 04 February 1997 16:28
>
> The one situation I think is difficult for natd to handle is is when ppp
> is running in -auto mode, and it reconnects on each dial-in with a
> different dynamcially assigned address.
>
> At the moment, natd can do device address lookup at startup, but to
> handle the above mentioned case, it would have to do a device address
> lookup for every packet. Is it possible to do this?
>
> I personally like having both ppp -alias as well as natd. Having the
> software embedded in ppp and enabled with the -alias switch makes life
> very easy for a great number of less sophisticated users.
>
> Charles Mott
>
>
> On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Brian Somers wrote:
>
> > You guessed it - Charles originally wrote the code so. Eventually, I'd
> > like to
> > remove the -alias switch from ppp and have the only implementation
being
> > in the natd code.
> >
> > Brian <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> <brian@freebsd.org>
<brian@utell.co.uk>
> > <http://www.awfulhak.demon.co.uk>;
> > Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour
> >
> > ----------
> > > From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>
> > > To: Eivind Eklund <eivind@dimaga.com>
> > > Cc: Charles Mott <cmott@srv.net>; Brian Somers
> > <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>; Ari Suutari <ari.suutari@ps.carel.fi>;
> > hackers@freebsd.org; brian@utell.co.uk
> > > Subject: Re: Single socket version of natd
> > > Date: 04 February 1997 10:49
> > >
> > > Eivind Eklund wrote:
> > > >
> > > > At 07:36 PM 2/3/97 -0700, Charles Mott wrote:
> > > > >Eivind has these updates and has integrated them into his
codebase,
> > > > >which he is continuing to work on. He writes that he has changed
some
> > of
> > > > >the compile options (ALIAS_ALLOW_INCOMING, ALIAS_SAME_PORTS, etc.)
to
> > ppp
> > > > >commands.
> > > >
> > > So are we talking about ppp, or natd here?
> > > teh subject line says natd..
> > > but sounds like that's not the case...
> > > (or has someone abstracted out the alias code to
> > > a separate module that can be used for both?
> > >
> > > julian
> >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702041659.QAA00486>