From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 8 23:57:21 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B7DD16A4B3 for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 23:57:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.anteva.net (smtp.anteva.net [209.63.222.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DE7743FA3 for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 23:57:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd@itpsg.com) Received: from localhost (fury.anteva.net [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 370F683272 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 00:57:20 -0600 (MDT) Received: from mail.anteva.net ([209.63.222.5]) by localhost (fury.anteva.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10025) with ESMTP id 13088-08 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 00:57:19 -0600 (MDT) Received: from VECTOR (unknown [204.176.204.140]) by mail.anteva.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 4560983006 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 00:57:19 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <002f01c38e32$771304f0$f501a8c0@VECTOR> From: "Vector" To: References: <008401c38e21$0eb936b0$6afea8c0@VECTOR> <002101c38e2a$fda426f0$8d00a8c0@marcos1> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 00:56:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at anteva.net Subject: Re: ipnat memory leak? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 06:57:21 -0000 Several reasons: Having it in the kernel improves performance natd chokes on the latest windoze worms and I have implemented some DoS prevention/worm protection in ipnat but I'm seeing this memory leak without my improvements there at all. If it's in the kernel, ipnat is kept under control when natd would normally be sucking the CPU dry and preventing things like remote logins, very slugish updates, etc... and others I won't go into at the moment. vec ----- Original Message ----- From: "marcos" To: "Vector" Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 12:02 AM Subject: Re: ipnat memory leak? > Why I want to do that?? > natd work with IPFW and so much better than ipfilter > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Vector" > To: > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 5:51 PM > Subject: ipnat memory leak? > > > > I was using ipfw and natd but I wanted to move nat into the kernel so I > > recompiled with ipfilter and ipnat. Now, after terminating natd, and > > setting up ipnat rules in /etc/ipnat.rules, I see memory increase at a > rate > > of just under 1MB per minutes. Has anyone else seen a memory leak in > ipnat > > or ipfilter? > > > > vec > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > >