On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 16:56:12 -0400 (EDT) Matthew Emmerton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Brett Glass wrote: > > > While working with a FreeBSD system this afternoon, I did something which killed > > natd (the NAT daemon), which was processing packets in the usual way via ipfw > > and a divert socket. > > > > The result? Network communications on the system simply went dead. > > > > It seems to me that ipfw should be able to "self-heal" (that is, bypass the > > rule) or reinvoke a daemon that's attached to a divert socket. Otherwise, > > the process that's attached to the socket becomes an Achilles' heel for > > the whole system. Crash it for any reason, and the system's offline. > > > > Ideas? > > Use kernel-mode IPNAT instead of user-mode natd? What is kernel-mode IPNAT? _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
