From owner-freebsd-questions Sat Jan 27 11:43:54 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from espen.oysnet.lan (login.oysnet.eu.org [64.32.206.153]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34E9E37B400 for ; Sat, 27 Jan 2001 11:43:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (eoyslebo@localhost) by espen.oysnet.lan (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0RJhVd25344 for ; Sat, 27 Jan 2001 14:43:32 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from oys@powertech.no) X-Authentication-Warning: espen.oysnet.lan: eoyslebo owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 14:43:30 -0500 (EST) From: Espen Oyslebo X-Sender: eoyslebo@espen.oysnet.lan To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: ipnat vs natd and ipf vs ipfw Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ipfw and ipf to my eye (without glasses that is) seem to do pretty much the same thing. The same is true for ipnat and natd. Of course there are differences between the two (ritgh?). If so: What are they? An example of a scenario where it would be advantagous to use an ipfw/natd solution: An example of a scenario where it would be advantagous to use an ipf/ipnat solution: A wacky example where some different combination (or even all of them) should be used: Currently, I have ipfw and natd doing their job fairly well. Is there any point in switching (yeah,yeah, don't fix it if it ain't broken). Thanks alot! Espen Oyslebo To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message