> On 18 Mar 2020, at 13:31, Neel Chauhan <n...@neelc.org> wrote: > > Hi freebsd-net@ mailing list, > > Right now, my firewall is a HP T730 thin client (with a Dell Broadcom 5720 > PCIe NIC) running FreeBSD 12.1 and IPFW's In-Kernel NAT. My ISP is "Wave G" > in the Seattle area, and I have the Gigabit plan. > > Speedtests usually give me 700 Mbps down/900 Mbps up, and 250-400 Mbps > down/800 Mbps up during the Coronavirus crisis. However, I'm having problems > with an application (Tor relays) where I am not able to use a lot of > bandwidth for Tor, Coronavirus-related telecommuting or not. My Tor server is > separate from my firewall. > > Which firewall gives better performance, IPFW's In-Kernel NAT or PF NAT? I am > dealing with 1000s of concurrent connections but browsing-level-bandwidth at > once with Tor. > I’d expect both ipfw and pf to happily saturate gigabit links with NAT, even on quite modest hardware. Are you sure the NAT code is the bottleneck?
Regards, Kristof _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
