On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 07:14:39AM -0400, jamal wrote: > > > Only if you also want to share it :) In the end I patched it to > > not share it which is much easier. > > I am trying to visualize: if you dont share, you must have 256K copies > then? Assuming also you have a fast lookup since that was design intent. They can't be shared anyway because each of those 256K rules NATs to a different IP address. > #ifdef CONFIG_HASH_SIZE > #define NAT_TAB_MASK CONFIGURED_HASH_SIZE > #else > #define NAT_TAB_MASK 15 > #endif > > What do you think? Sorry, I think I'll have to poke my eyes out :) But yeah if we ever get a generic dynamic hash table implmenetation then I'd be happy for act_nat to use that. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
