From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jul  2 14:38:26 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CDEB37B404
	for <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>; Wed,  2 Jul 2003 14:38:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from laptop.tenebras.com (laptop.tenebras.com [66.92.188.18])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2FE4843FD7
	for <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>; Wed,  2 Jul 2003 14:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from kudzu@tenebras.com)
Received: (qmail 21894 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2003 21:38:24 -0000
Received: from sapphire.tenebras.com (HELO tenebras.com) (192.168.188.241)
  by 0 with SMTP; 2 Jul 2003 21:38:24 -0000
Message-ID: <3F0350C7.7010009@tenebras.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 14:38:15 -0700
From: Michael Sierchio <kudzu@tenebras.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i386; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030425
X-Accept-Language: en-us, zh-tw, zh-cn, fr, en, de-de
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org
References: <3F0316DE.3040301@tenebras.com>
	<20030702183838.GB4179@pit.databus.com> <3F0327FE.3030609@tenebras.com>
	<3F0331EE.6020707@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <3F0331EE.6020707@mac.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Performance improvement for NAT in IPFIREWALL
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions <freebsd-ipfw.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ipfw>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 21:38:26 -0000

Chuck Swiger wrote:

> Many people are wrong, then.  NAT is not a security feature.

We simply disagree.

> [ NAT sucks.  In a very useful way, of course.  Exogenous requirements 
> may impose unreasonable constraints upon implementing the technically 
> preferrable solution, just as "inept excess verbiage may disqualify 
> qualifiers".  And "But soft, what light through yonder window breaks?" 
> and other tasty bits from the "Applesoft Reference Manual".... ]

Yep, NAT sucks.  Exogenous requirements are often generated by marketing
fools who think we need to match a technically trivial and meaningless
feature in someone else's product.  However, twenty some odd years of
software engineering has taught me to pick my fights ;-)

Back to the original topic -- divert functionality for ng_ksocket?
Useful for much more than nat.