From owner-freebsd-net Sun Jan 27 10:54:14 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from c7.campus.utcluj.ro (c7.campus.utcluj.ro [193.226.6.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E49FE37B423 for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2002 10:54:03 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 29040 invoked by uid 1008); 27 Jan 2002 18:53:47 -0000 Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 20:53:47 +0200 From: veedee@c7.campus.utcluj.ro To: Matthew Emmerton Cc: Clemens Hermann , BSD NET-List Subject: Re: natd restart Message-ID: <20020127205347.C28961@c7.campus.utcluj.ro> References: <003c01c1a701$da5209e0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> <20020127101854.B267@idefix.local> <00b501c1a742$9a89d950$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <00b501c1a742$9a89d950$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca>; from matt@gsicomp.on.ca on Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 09:55:03AM -0500 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 Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 09:55:03AM -0500, Matthew Emmerton wrote: > > Am 27.01.2002 um 02:11:30 schrieb Matthew Emmerton: > > > > Hi Matt, > > > > > Here's the patch that I wrote some time ago. > > > > thanks a lot! > > Did you send-pr the patch? It seems quite necessary to be added. > > Not yet. One of the things that I don't like about this patch is that old > rules still stay around (re-reading the configuration will only modify > existing rules and add new rules.) I'm also taking a lot of flak on my side > of the fence since NAT runs as a userland process, so every packet gets > copied between the kernel and userland twice (once on the way in, once on > the way out.) Apparently Linux doesn't do this. > > I'm looking at making natd into a kernel option ("options IPNAT") and using > a combination of sysctls and a front-end program to manage how nat operates, > much like "options IPFIREWALL" and ipfw works today. That would be just great. A lot of people would benefit from this. I had to switch to IPF/IPNAT because of the cpu load NATD had. But for some reason, I find NATD to be a bit "better" than IPNAT (I'm having a lot of problems with Audiogalaxy's satellite service running with ftp). > This (in my mind) should greatly enhance the throughput of FreeBSD's NAT and > keep those Linux people from bashing us (or me, at least.) Sorry, I *was* one of them :) veedee. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message