From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: kernel oops with NAT in 2.6.16.13 kernel Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:04:06 +0200 Message-ID: <452C9766.4020304@trash.net> References: <00fb01c6e91d$08bf3570$4c01a8c0@elitecore26> <452B29F2.70105@trash.net> <02a901c6ec2f$f5d1e730$4c01a8c0@elitecore26> <452B372E.3020206@trash.net> <02d001c6ec35$3bf7b870$4c01a8c0@elitecore26> <452C8694.302@trash.net> <002f01c6ed00$c21c5f20$4c01a8c0@elitecore26> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org Return-path: To: Nishit Shah In-Reply-To: <002f01c6ed00$c21c5f20$4c01a8c0@elitecore26> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Nishit Shah wrote: > Are you talking about MASQ/SNAT case ?? Yes. > well in both NAT cases upto 4000 c/s, everything is pretty same, but at > 3,00,000 connections, system is freezed in MASQ/SNAT case, so don't have > idea about c/s rate degradation. Try SNATing to multiple IPs using multiple rules and some match to distribute the traffic (like matching on even/uneven IPs or something like that). That should show if finding a unique tuple really is the problem.