* IPTables Feature set and performance.
@ 2002-12-02 21:33 hard__ware
2002-12-02 23:22 ` Michael
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: hard__ware @ 2002-12-02 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ccmike; +Cc: netfilter
I belive you cant Mangle Packets as well on PIX Firewall
Such as TTL Values & MSS Clamps,
here are some things on why i consider netfilter over any other product for
now ..
1) its easy to understand & it works well
2) Completely Open Source Project
3) Using the help from www.lartc.org QoS can be seamlessly intergrated
4) Squid + Netfilter also offers more advantages like
Speedy Web Cache & ACL Rules to Block ADs ect,
5) IPTState is a good utillity for showing your Connections Through & Too
your netfilter firewall
6) IPTables Allows you to set Variables for its ip_conntrack_helpers such as
ftp & irc like,
the Default Port No: to track is 21 this can be changed to Many or Just One
using sysctrl options
7) Kernel Level Networking & Filtering /w Linux ..
have you got a problem, well if your good enough you
can make changes to your kernel / modules that will
improve / manipulate the way your IP V4 Box works.
hope this helps a bit,
Hard__warE
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: IPTables Feature set and performance.
2002-12-02 21:33 IPTables Feature set and performance hard__ware
@ 2002-12-02 23:22 ` Michael
2002-12-04 13:17 ` Roberto Nibali
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michael @ 2002-12-02 23:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: IPtables Users
hard__ware wrote:
>I belive you cant Mangle Packets as well on PIX Firewall
>Such as TTL Values & MSS Clamps,
>
>here are some things on why i consider netfilter over any other product for
>now ..
>
>1) its easy to understand & it works well
>2) Completely Open Source Project
>3) Using the help from www.lartc.org QoS can be seamlessly intergrated
>
>4) Squid + Netfilter also offers more advantages like
>Speedy Web Cache & ACL Rules to Block ADs ect,
>
>5) IPTState is a good utillity for showing your Connections Through & Too
>your netfilter firewall
>
>6) IPTables Allows you to set Variables for its ip_conntrack_helpers such as
>ftp & irc like,
>the Default Port No: to track is 21 this can be changed to Many or Just One
>using sysctrl options
>
>7) Kernel Level Networking & Filtering /w Linux ..
>have you got a problem, well if your good enough you
>can make changes to your kernel / modules that will
>improve / manipulate the way your IP V4 Box works.
>
>
>
In addition to this, I have found one mention of throughput capabilities
of iptables. According to this reference :http://www.hipac.org/ (The
performance test links), iptables does have significant limitation of
throughput when large (Sequential) rulesets are used. I believe under
ideal circumstances, and with carefull attention paid the impact can be
minimised.
I haven't replicated the tests, and also do not know how authoritative
the tests are.
If the tests results are accurate, this might help in making comparisons
and decision making. Does anyone have evidence to backup the findings of
nf-hipac peaple?
Cheers,
Michael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: IPTables Feature set and performance.
2002-12-02 23:22 ` Michael
@ 2002-12-04 13:17 ` Roberto Nibali
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Roberto Nibali @ 2002-12-04 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael; +Cc: netfilter
Hi,
> In addition to this, I have found one mention of throughput capabilities
> of iptables. According to this reference :http://www.hipac.org/ (The
> performance test links), iptables does have significant limitation of
> throughput when large (Sequential) rulesets are used. I believe under
Exactly.
> ideal circumstances, and with carefull attention paid the impact can be
> minimised.
Exactly.
But simply consider the fact that some people do not write their fw rules by
hand, they generate it via a meta language layer. It is apparent that the
generation of rulesets which span over multiple packet filter instances are
implicit non-optimised.
Also consider the fact that the way nf-hipac is implemented, the matching rule
lookup will always be equally or faster to netfilter's table lookup per
definition and code.
> I haven't replicated the tests, and also do not know how authoritative
> the tests are.
Preliminary tests were done by me and you can certainly consider them to be
authoritative. Unfortunately due to health reasons and limited spare time I had
to stop further tests. I will pick up the conduct of tests maybe in the
beginning of next year. Together with a friend of mine I've also written a paper
(for a link, please search this mailinglist archive) about the inefficiencies of
various rule matching algorithms based on observation, pragmatic testing and
code reading.
> If the tests results are accurate, this might help in making comparisons
> and decision making. Does anyone have evidence to backup the findings of
> nf-hipac peaple?
I do have some numbers and I have posted them to various mailinglists. Also if
you go to the nf-hipac page itself, you see a quite a convincing test result.
Best regards,
Roberto Nibali, ratz
--
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq' | dc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* IPTables Feature set and performance.
@ 2002-12-02 18:25 ccmike
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: ccmike @ 2002-12-02 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
O wise netfilter guruz, I pray unto thee in hopes you can answer my most
humble questions.
I have been all over the net and looked thru the mailing list archives, but
cannot find an answer to questions that have been asked a number of times,
but never with the proper specifications, so I will attempt to ask in a more
proper form.
First: netfilter vs pix
considering packet filtering only, and ignoring the "extra" things such as vpn
and pretty gui, administration costs, purchase price, and CYA.
What things can I do with an iptables firewall that I cannot do with a pix
firewall, I know about log tagging, but what else?
If the "costs" are not an issue, and the cisco extras are not necessary, would
you go with a pix or a netfilter solution and why? (skip the 'cause linux
rulez answers).
It seems that every time that this question was asked in the past the answer
was "pix comes with cisco CYA", or "what about the admin overhead", or
"depends on your requirements". I am interested (as I am sure others are) in
the technical differences. I am not trying to build a business case.
Second: Performance
If I make a monolithic kernel with everything stripped out of it except for
the code I need to run a netfilter firewall with stateful inspection, and I
have only the basic ruleset (everything out, established+mail+web+ssh in,
drop illegal ip addresses and flag combinations). basically a network noise
filter. How many new connections per second can I expect to handle on what
type of box? What type of thruput should I expect on what type of box?
Please note, I have both types of firewalls, and I am just trying to plan out
how many of what I should put where and why. I really would prefer to use
netfilter over pix, it will be an educational exercise for me. I can D/L
freeswan, and all the other goodies, and have plenty of boxen lying around
collecting dust, lots of time and get paid no matter what I decide to do (see
sig).
There has to be someone, somewhere, who understands what I am asking and has
the answers. I have the asbestos underwear properly installed, so flame on.
I will summarize back to the list.
- --
Mike Taylor. GSEC Non Impediti Ratione Cogitationis
Coordinator of Systems Administration and Network Security
Indiana State University. Rankin Hall Rm 039
210 N 7th St. Terre Haute, IN.
Voice: 812-237-8843
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE966WlknPysOadsKcRAj8HAJ0fYo3EBa9dcjKB/rbwcNRCKE+RpwCgulCb
38DjnIigdHaCkyWmWbpkyNA=
=mReT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-12-04 13:17 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-12-02 21:33 IPTables Feature set and performance hard__ware
2002-12-02 23:22 ` Michael
2002-12-04 13:17 ` Roberto Nibali
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-12-02 18:25 ccmike
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.