Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 3 Jan 2003 16:13:52 -0800 (PST)
From:      Avleen Vig <lists-freebsd@silverwraith.com>
To:        randall ehren <randall@ucsb.edu>
Cc:        Avleen Vig <lists-freebsd@silverwraith.com>, "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: incoming bandwidth limiting using ipfilter
Message-ID:  <20030103161007.F17456@guava.silverwraith.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0301031533560.78558-100000@isber.ucsb.edu>
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.33.0301031533560.78558-100000@isber.ucsb.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, randall ehren wrote:

> not to stray too far, but if IPFW is set to allow all incoming packets and is
> only used for shaping, and you have ipfilter handling nat, then it seems it
> would just be:
>  network card --> IPFW (traffic shape) --> IPF (filter+nat) --> userland
>  i guess an internally NAT address would go back out as:
>   IPF --> IPFW --> network card

We actually found it goes:

Internal Net -> NIC -> IPF+NAT -> IPFW -> World
World -> IPF+NAT -> IPFW -> NIC -> Internal net

After seeing this, I didn't even bother to see what the interal side of
the router processed as. I'm sure it would have given me a headache trying
to set up the runs.

Suffice to say, IPF+NAT always sees the packets first (at least on the
outer side of the router)

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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030103161007.F17456>