Large scale NAT - problem resolved

[veedee at c7.campus.utcluj.ro]

On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 01:03:51PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 veedee at 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