Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 15:52:56 -0600 (MDT) From: Jake Ott <jott@frii.net> To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Cc: <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: IPFW & natd vs ipfilter & ipnat Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.30.0107301552420.2093-100000@io.frii.com> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20010730143219.04cbbad0@marble.sentex.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Because of CPU or because of protocol? -Jake On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > Nothing formal, but on my 486 at home, I do get about 33% better throughput > on NATed connections via ipnat vs. natd using DSL and PPPoE. > > ---Mike > > > At 11:56 AM 7/30/01 -0500, Detective S.R. Ross Computer Crime division wrote: > > >I was wondering if there have ever been any benchmarking done for > >the the performance differences between IPFW & IPF & their counter parts. > > > > > > > > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > >with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.30.0107301552420.2093-100000>