[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PF and "route-to"
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.
Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.