From owner-freebsd-stable  Tue Jul  6 17:25:39 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from freeway.dcfinc.com (cx74889-a.phnx3.az.home.com [24.1.193.157])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BC8C14F55
	for <stable@FreeBSD.org>; Tue,  6 Jul 1999 17:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from chad@freeway.dcfinc.com)
Received: (from chad@localhost)
	by freeway.dcfinc.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA24812
	for stable@FreeBSD.org; Tue, 6 Jul 1999 17:25:32 -0700 (MST)
	(envelope-from chad)
From: "Chad R. Larson" <chad@DCFinc.com>
Message-Id: <199907070025.RAA24812@freeway.dcfinc.com>
Subject: PPP
To: stable@FreeBSD.org
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 17:25:32 -0700 (MST)
Reply-To: chad@DCFinc.com
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL40 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

A friend has asked me to help him set up a box that will be:

1)  A demand dial router to his ISP
B)  A Network Address Translator for machines on his LAN

This has probably been discussed before, but would anyone with
some experience doing PPP like to pipe up with the pros and cons
of:

A)  user level PPP with the tunnel device
2)  the Kernel PPP link, with PPPD and NATD

It looks to me, at first blush, that the user space PPP program
would be easier to configure, and rolls the NAT function into
the same place.  Plus, it demand dials without external chat or
kermit scripts.  Is the performance similar?  Any other things
to look out for?

	-crl
--
Chad R. Larson (CRL15)   602-953-1392   Brother, can you paradigm?
chad@dcfinc.com         chad@larsons.org          larson1@home.net   
DCF, Inc. - 14623 North 49th Place, Scottsdale, Arizona 85254-2207


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message