Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 10:05:47 -1000 From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> To: Christer Hermansson <mail@chdevelopment.se> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Re: nat and ipfw - divert or builtin Message-ID: <46F8189B.900@psg.com> In-Reply-To: <46F68B1C.6020303@chdevelopment.se> References: <46F5FF0A.7030203@psg.com> <46F68B1C.6020303@chdevelopment.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> divert > ipnat > ipfw's integrated nat > > I believe the integrated version makes configuration simpler. I would > choose the old classic divert with ipfw if it is for a important network > that must work, but if I was running -current I would try the integrated > variant beacuse it seems to be simpler to use. you seem to imply that you have reason to suspect that ipfw integrated nat might not be reliable, or at least not as reliable as divert+natd. any particular experiences or gossip to tell? randy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46F8189B.900>