From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan 28 13:42:21 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BEA116A4CE
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:42:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from c7.campus.utcluj.ro (c7.campus.utcluj.ro [193.226.6.226])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AF42A43D39
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:42:19 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from veedee@c7.campus.utcluj.ro)
Received: (qmail 23501 invoked by uid 1008); 28 Jan 2004 21:42:18 -0000
From: veedee@c7.campus.utcluj.ro
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:42:18 +0200
To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Message-ID: <20040128214218.GA23393@c7.campus.utcluj.ro>
References: <20040128204603.GA19311@c7.campus.utcluj.ro>
	<Pine.BSF.4.21.0401281301260.6703-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0401281301260.6703-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Large scale NAT - problem resolved
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:42:21 -0000

On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 01:03:51PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 veedee@c7.campus.utcluj.ro wrote:
> 
> > 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?
> 
> Well for people using ipfw.. 
> if_nat requires ipfilter
> 
> If it 'crashes' that sugests that a bug exists..
> anyone know what 'crashes' means? gets slow?

Yup, sorry... I meant slow. CPU usage will go to 100% (and beyond, if
possible :/ ).

> if so then probably using a hash table somehwere would fix it..
 

-- 
| Radu Bogdan 'veedee' Rusu
| NetSysAdm at campus dot utcluj dot ro
| Personal gallery at http://rbrusu.com
| ...mirroring FreeBSD and coffee