From owner-freebsd-current Mon May 5 13:08:05 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA16133 for current-outgoing; Mon, 5 May 1997 13:08:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korin.warman.org.pl (korin.warman.org.pl [148.81.160.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA16109 for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 13:07:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (abial@localhost) by korin.warman.org.pl (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA12952; Mon, 5 May 1997 22:07:09 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 22:07:09 +0200 (MET DST) From: Andrzej Bialecki To: Archie Cobbs cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: divert still broken? In-Reply-To: <199705051812.LAA05845@bubba.whistle.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 5 May 1997, Archie Cobbs wrote: > > [ cc'ing this to freebsd-hackers as well ] > > > > it is broken.. > > > garret broke it and we have yet to fix it... > > > > In this case my (yet to be written) monitoring/accounting > > program will just read packets from (read-only ?) divert socket 98 > > not bothering itself with returning packets back to kernel. > > Sound like a good idea :-) > > I'm doing some more work on ipfw and divert to solve a need we have... > and planning on making these changes (how much gets checked in to be > determined later by group consensus, but patch will be available): On the same subject: how much work would it require to shift the NAT code (from ppp -alias, or natd) to the kernel space (LKM ?) ? I think it would tremendously enhance the performance of the NAT setup, allowing for much greater throughput. Just my twopence... Sincerely yours, --- Andrzej Bialecki FreeBSD: Turning PCs Into Workstations http://www.freebsd.org Research and Academic Network in Poland