Re: PF and "route-to"

[Henning Brauer <lists-openbsd@bsws.de>]

On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 11:56:18AM +1000, Darren Reed wrote:
> Why not just add another mbuf tag type which is a "pf-routed" tag and just
> call pf_test() from pf_route() ?  Or is that too much overhead to check for
> before calling pf_route() ?  Or is there some other design limitation I'm
> not seeing ?

it's just that there's a performance penalty and we don't see much need for
this - you can NAT on the inner interface. 

-- 
http://2suck.net/hhwl.html
Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)