From owner-freebsd-net Mon Feb 3 21:41: 1 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2418E37B401 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 21:41:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from corbulon.video-collage.com (corbulon.video-collage.com [64.35.99.179]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B84443F43 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 21:40:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mi@corbulon.video-collage.com) Received: from corbulon.video-collage.com (mi@localhost.video-collage.com [127.0.0.1]) by corbulon.video-collage.com (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h145evM3062765 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Feb 2003 00:40:58 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mi@corbulon.video-collage.com) Received: (from mi@localhost) by corbulon.video-collage.com (8.12.7/8.12.7/Submit) id h145evwa062764; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 00:40:57 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mi) From: Mikhail Teterin Message-Id: <200302040540.h145evwa062764@corbulon.video-collage.com> Subject: Re: Does natd(8) really need to see _all_ packets? In-Reply-To: <002801c2cc0e$dba94ff0$83ee35ca@Beastie> To: Barry Irwin Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 00:40:56 -0500 (EST) Cc: net@FreeBSD.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL100 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.21 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > your best solution is to add a skipto before the divert rule. Thank you, Barry, but is not that what I'm doing in the sample? > You can therefore skip any traffic from a private address to another > private address. Anything not matched by the skipto rule gets fed to > the divert socket. The trick was to figure out, what could be skipped, and what could not. I'm wondering, if I got that right -- it seems to work find, but does it leave something open? Before I can recommend it to others, I'd like to be more sure :-) -mi > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mikhail Teterin" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 7:27 AM > Subject: Does natd(8) really need to see _all_ packets? > > > > Hi! > > > > This question bothered me for a while -- most of the traffic on my > > LAN is just that -- local. Yet my gw/firewall machine only has one > > interface -- with two IP addresses -- private and public on it. > > > > The DSL modem is plugged into the switch just like everything else. > > > > I doubt this is a unique setup. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message