Re: stop/start iptables vs. "iptables-restore"

[Martijn Lievaart <m@rtij.nl>]

Alex Tang wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> We run a linux based product (RHEL4 based, kernel-2.6.9-55, and 
> iptables-1.2.11). During the running of the product, when we make 
> changes to the iptables configuration, we use the SysV-like RHEL 
> script "/etc/init.d/iptables restart", which effectively stops 
> iptables, unloads all of the iptables based kernel modules, then 
> starts iptables and all the kernel stuff.
> A colleague recently asked why we're not using "iptables-restore" 
> instead of the script which does "stop/start".  I'm looking to see if 
> you know of any reasons why we should or should not use 
> iptables-restore vs. "stop/start".  Does it matter if the number of 
> connections on the system is high?  Our product can sometimes handle 
> many millions of connections per day.

The RHEL start/stop scripts do use iptables-save and -restore. They are 
as efficient as they can be.

HTH,
M4