From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:28:30 +0000 From: Eris Discordia To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>, lucio@proxima.alt.za Message-ID: <361D28914B37F214D0B92EA7@[192.168.1.2]> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: Re: [9fans] nat Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4661247a-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > most people have plenty of power to spare on their cpu > servers and feeding a dsl modem at < 10mbit/sec is really > trivial these days. were you thinking of natting >1gbit? Needless to say, very capable (Linux-based) DSL modems with highly configurable built-in switch, router, NAT, and firewal are dirt cheap. Why not use one? Use D-Link and you can buy two for the price of one ;-) If you are brand-sensitive try Linksys or Netgear, though they are known to be picky. In case you insist on implementing NAT I assure you that you have at least one intent reader for any comments on how implementing NAT on Plan 9 differs from UNIX clones. --On Sunday, November 16, 2008 11:49 AM -0500 erik quanstrom wrote: >> Running NAT at user level would, assuming I'm not totally off base, be >> quite expensive and the hardware on which it runs would have to be >> pretty powerful. > > most people have plenty of power to spare on their cpu > servers and feeding a dsl modem at < 10mbit/sec is really > trivial these days. were you thinking of natting >1gbit? > > - erik >