From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Oct 10 12:14:21 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from eeyore.local.dohd.org (d0030.dtk.chello.nl [213.46.0.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5FCC37B502; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:14:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by eeyore.local.dohd.org (Postfix, from userid 1008) id A23D8BB09; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:14:00 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:14:00 +0200 From: Mark Huizer To: Doug Poland Cc: Mark Huizer , owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Routing without ipfw? Message-ID: <20001010211400.B15021@dohd.cx> References: <20001010191123.A15021@dohd.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from doug@polands.org on Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 02:00:04PM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > That's a different question. Yes, you need ipfw for natd. > > But ipfw is a loadable kernel module > > > > Mark > > So, logically, if you need natd for routing between interfaces, > and natd needs ipfw, then ipfw is required for routing. Either > compiled into the kernel or as a lkm? > You don't need natd for routing. You need natd for address translation. That's the difference in the question. And ipfw can be either kernel or lkm, but if I'm not mistaken you need a kernel anyway (for IP_DIVERT, see natd's manpage) Mark To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message