[c-nsp] Cisco PXF

[sthaug at nethelp.no]

> We may not support that portion of NAT in the hardware
> forwarding path but on those platforms at least there
> is a punt path and that should be taken. The performance
> will be pretty horrible but at least the packets would go through.
> 
> That's not always the case on some other hardware forwarding platforms
> that are "all features in hardware or it doesn't work at all" scenario.

Yup, and there are of course divergent views on what is preferable here.
Obviously no one solution is going to be the best for all users. For our
usage, the "all features in hardware or it doesn't work at all" seems to
be the best solution. We use a lot of boxes from a competing vendor :-)

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug at nethelp.no