From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Jan 30 11:13:26 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA25477
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:13:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ravenock.cybercity.dk (ravenock.cybercity.dk [194.16.57.32])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA25466
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from sos@localhost) by ravenock.cybercity.dk (8.8.5/8.7.3) id UAA29216; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 20:14:25 +0100 (MET)
From: Søren Schmidt <sos@ravenock.cybercity.dk>
Message-Id: <199701301914.UAA29216@ravenock.cybercity.dk>
Subject: Re: ipdivert & masqd
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970130190212.00b22780@dimaga.com> from Eivind Eklund at "Jan 30, 97 07:02:14 pm"
To: eivind@dimaga.com (Eivind Eklund)
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 20:14:15 +0100 (MET)
Cc: imp@village.org, hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL30 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

In reply to Eivind Eklund who wrote:
> At 08:04 AM 1/30/97 -0700, you wrote:
> >In message <199701292038.MAA19786@freefall.freebsd.org> Darren Reed writes:
> >> It is a *much* better idea to redirect IRC to a local TCP port and process
> >> it using a proxy agent.  Same could also be said for FTP.
> >
> >Yes.  It is.  However, you also have to do the same for Talk, Real
> >Audio and at least one other protocol that encodes either the IP
> >address or ports of the system.
> 
> I'm thinking about doing transparent proxying for the protocols, but I want
> to see how well the packet-patching version run first.  As it is, it is
> (hopefully) right in 99% of the cases, and it scales well.  If I get
> reports of real-life problems I'll make it a priority to make proxies, but
> not before.
> (And the packet-patchers will still be an option - for most people, they
> probably are a better or as good solution.)

Hmm, I've done a NAT implementation, and my experience tells me that
doing ftp, irc, realaudio etc in the NAT itself, (I like the name
packet-patchers :) ) is the most efficient way of doing things, 
and it saves the user for all that proxy fiddleing, they see the
world as if they where on the net directly...

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Søren Schmidt               (sos@FreeBSD.org)               FreeBSD Core Team
                Even more code to hack -- will it ever end
..