From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org  Fri Nov 27 09:16:39 2020
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
 by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FE294A3059
 for <freebsd-current@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org>;
 Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:16:39 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bsd-lists@bsdforge.com)
Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (static-24-113-41-81.wavecable.com
 [24.113.41.81])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256
 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256)
 (Client CN "ultimatedns.net",
 Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cj8Bv1Lqqz4pTH
 for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:16:38 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bsd-lists@bsdforge.com)
Received: from ultimatedns.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by udns.ultimatedns.net (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTP id 0AR9Gbrs040390
 for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 01:16:43 -0800 (PST)
 (envelope-from bsd-lists@bsdforge.com)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 01:16:37 -0800
From: Chris <bsd-lists@bsdforge.com>
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: firewall choice
In-Reply-To: <X8C43AprLKhr3xxy@rpi4.local>
References: <X8C43AprLKhr3xxy@rpi4.local>
User-Agent: UDNSMS/17.0
Message-ID: <2653d213518332070e63e2c8e6ec7a4f@bsdforge.com>
X-Sender: bsd-lists@bsdforge.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Cj8Bv1Lqqz4pTH
X-Spamd-Bar: /
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 15.00];
 ASN(0.00)[asn:11404, ipnet:24.113.0.0/16, country:US];
 local_wl_ip(0.00)[24.113.41.81]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:16:39 -0000

On 2020-11-27 00:29, tech-lists wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> What's the "best" [1] choice for firewalling these days, in the list's 
> opinion?

I can't speak for the whole list. ;-)
But in my opinion with tables totaling over 150 million IPs. I'm casting a 
vote
for pf(4). It's wildly easy on resources and as fast and flexible as I could 
ever
hope to want. Started using it years ago, and never looked back. :-)

> 
> There's pf, ipf and ipfw. Which is the one being most recently 
> developed/updated?
> I'm used to using pf, have done for over a decade. But OpenBSD's pf has 
> diverged a
> lot more from when it first came across. There seems to be a lot more 
> options.
> Is FreeBSD's pf being actively developed still?

Yes. It is actively developed.
> 
> ipfw seems a lot more syntatically complex than pf. Is it more capable also?
> I know nothing about ipf yet.
> 
> [1] up-to-date, versatile, low overhead, high throughput, IPv6-able,
> traffic shaping/queueing
> 
> thanks,

--Chris