https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219316
Alexander Vereeken changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|patch |
--
You are receiving this m
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219316
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|i...@freebsd.org|
Assignee|don...@freebsd.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219316
Lutz Donnerhacke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|New |In Progress
CC|
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219316
--- Comment #12 from l...@donnerhacke.de ---
Ah, I missed the previous comment.
>>1) Large Scale NAT violates the happy eyeball requirement, that a given client
>> should always use the same external IP while communicating to a given
>> se
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219316
--- Comment #11 from l...@donnerhacke.de ---
For flows the extend to ip:mask (per entry) does not really help:
- ports and protocol numbers are not covered
- hashs are not radix trees, they can handle only an uniform mask
And there is alr
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219316
--- Comment #10 from Julian Elischer ---
reply to self:
ah ipfw doesn't support addr:mask
I remember it working on a version that did at one stage...
so maybe the answer is to extend the table add command to support addr:mask
I think tha
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219316
--- Comment #9 from Julian Elischer ---
(In reply to lutz from comment #0)
>For Carrier Grade NAT environments any simple NAT table selection is not
>usable:
>
>1) Large Scale NAT violates the happy eyeball requirement, that a given client
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219316
Julian Elischer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jul...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219316
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Assignee|freebsd-b.
