Performance improvement for NAT in IPFIREWALL

[Michael Sierchio]

Chuck Swiger wrote:

> Many people are wrong, then.  NAT is not a security feature.

We simply disagree.

> [ NAT sucks.  In a very useful way, of course.  Exogenous requirements 
> may impose unreasonable constraints upon implementing the technically 
> preferrable solution, just as "inept excess verbiage may disqualify 
> qualifiers".  And "But soft, what light through yonder window breaks?" 
> and other tasty bits from the "Applesoft Reference Manual".... ]

Yep, NAT sucks.  Exogenous requirements are often generated by marketing
fools who think we need to match a technically trivial and meaningless
feature in someone else's product.  However, twenty some odd years of
software engineering has taught me to pick my fights ;-)

Back to the original topic -- divert functionality for ng_ksocket?
Useful for much more than nat.