Re: IPRoute2 vs Iptables

["Wennie V. Lagmay" <wlagmay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Your right Peter, I do my own testing and found out that iptables is not a 
system or cpu sucker.

wennie
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Surda" <shurdeek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 12:04 AM
Subject: Re:  IPRoute2 vs Iptables


> On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 03:40:05PM +0300, Wennie V. Lagmay wrote:
> > Hi all,
> hi
>
> > As I read into the forum, NATting (SNAT) is expensive, using iptables to
> > translate IP sucks the performance of the system.
> Who says that? I never experienced this even on large networks. In fact I 
> saw
> cisco's NAT repeatedly freeze while an old pentium with linux was doing 
> fine
> in the same situation.
>
> BTW iproute's NAT was apparently disabled some time ago because there were
> problems. I think it's mentioned in the docs.
>
> > Wennie
> Bye,
>
> Peter Surda (Shurdeek) <shurdeek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, ICQ 10236103, 
> +436505122023
>
> --
>       The product Microsoft sells isn't the software; it's comfort.
>         The product that Linux vendors usually sell is freedom.
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list
> LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc 

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc