LukeD at pobox.com
Sat May 3 01:01:52 UTC 2008
On Fri, 2 May 2008, Zane C.B. wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:50:06 +0100
> Bruce Cran <bruce at cran.org.uk> wrote:
>> Doug Hardie wrote:
>>> FreeBSD supports 3 firewalls: IPF, IPFW, and PF. Some time ago
>>> (perhaps years) I seem to recall some discussion that one or more
>>> of those was better maintained and higher quality than the
>>> others. I don't see any indications of this in the handbook.
>>> Several years ago I needed to do traffic shaping and used IPFW
>>> with dummynet. It worked but the need eventually went away.
>>> More recently I needed to incorporate spamd which defaults to PF
>>> so I used that. However, now I am back to needing traffic
>>> shaping again. I suspect trying to use both PF and IPFW
>>> simultaneously will not be a good approach. In addition, there
>>> now are instructions for using spamd with IPFW so it appears that
>>> either PF or IPFW will do what I need. Is there any additional
>>> information available to assist in selecting between those?
>> As I understand it pf is often found to be easiest to use and has
>> lots of features like altq and os fingerprinting but is quite a bit
>> slower than ipfw.
> There is one thing that IPFW has that PF does not that I have found
> to be very handy at times. It can be used to setup firewall rules
> that only affect a specific group or user.
PF can do this too.
There were threading/locking/crashing issues when last I tried to use
that feature of PF back in FreeBSD 5.x, but that was a very long time
More information about the freebsd-questions