From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Aug 24 21:14:27 2004
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 43A5616A4CE
	for <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:14:27 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from btsoftware.com (www.btsoftware.nl [213.84.82.9])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9FE7943D39
	for <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:14:25 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from bts@iae.nl)
Received: from viper.office (viper.office [192.168.0.1] ) by btsoftware.com
    (Hethmon Brothers Smtpd) ; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:13:53 +0200
Message-Id: <200408242313.5343345.6@btsoftware.com>
From: "Martin" <bts@iae.nl>
To: "fbsd-ipfw@0x10.com" <fbsd-ipfw@0x10.com>,
	"patrick" <patrick@esoltani.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:13:51 +0200 (CEST)
Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: PMMail 2.20.2382 for OS/2 Warp 4.5
In-Reply-To: <412BA814.9060406@esoltani.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: "freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org" <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: natd and ipfw problems...hope this is the right place=)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Martin <bts@iae.nl>
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: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:14:27 -0000

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:41:56 -0700, patrick wrote:
>- In your /etc/natd.conf add
>redirect_port tcp 192.168.1.100:80 82.82.82.82:80

Basic idea is pretty good, but you have to be aware the static NAT
does seem to have a memory leak. Transfering a couple
of Gigabytes through static NAT gives a memory footprint for NAT in "top" 
of something like 50 Mb. Not sure if this is TCP or UDP related,
but it does happen with eMule/Overnet on 4462/4663.

Martin.