Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:46:03 +0200 From: veedee@c7.campus.utcluj.ro To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Large scale NAT - problem resolved Message-ID: <20040128204603.GA19311@c7.campus.utcluj.ro> In-Reply-To: <20040128204120.GF11253@FreeBSD.org.ua> References: <1075275264.401766007d839@isp.polynet.lviv.ua> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0401280015070.176-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <20040128204120.GF11253@FreeBSD.org.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 10:41:20PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 12:15:56AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Andriy Korud wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > At last I've managed to build stable NAT on FreeBSD box for 34Mbit link and > > > ~2000 clients (cable modem network). > > > At full speed (34Mbit) CPU usage is 0% and system load is 0.0 :-) > > > > > > > It'd be really interesting to see how natd would handle such a load.... > > > You must be kidding. ;) Agreed. NATd "crashes" with 400 clients on AMD Athlon 900Mhz. :( ipnat works fine. This raises a question... is there any point in still having natd? (don't throw rocks at me please, I'm just asking). Or maybe it's still being used for servers with less clients to nat? > Cheers, > -- > Ruslan Ermilov > FreeBSD committer > ru@FreeBSD.org -- | Radu Bogdan 'veedee' Rusu | NetSysAdm at campus dot utcluj dot ro | Personal gallery at http://rbrusu.com | ...mirroring FreeBSD and coffee
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040128204603.GA19311>