From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Mar  6 01:55:08 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88F23D90
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Wed,  6 Mar 2013 01:55:08 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from brett@lariat.net)
Received: from lariat.net (lariat.net [66.62.230.51])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 277C49BB
 for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; Wed,  6 Mar 2013 01:55:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from Toshi.lariat.net (IDENT:ppp1000.lariat.net@lariat.net
 [66.119.58.2] (may be forged))
 by lariat.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA04749;
 Tue, 5 Mar 2013 18:40:51 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <201303060140.SAA04749@lariat.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:40:50 -0700
To: Robert Simmons <rsimmons0@gmail.com>, freebsd-security@freebsd.org
From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net>
Subject: Re: Firewall Options
In-Reply-To: <CA+QLa9DgZWoajW0dTkNjOGsDsS=ggXefJK9v+traZq4F99uUnQ@mail.g
 mail.com>
References: <CA+QLa9DgZWoajW0dTkNjOGsDsS=ggXefJK9v+traZq4F99uUnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 02:29:37 +0000
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
 <freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 01:55:08 -0000

This brings up a question I hadn't thought to ask before. How SMP-friendly is
the current implementation of IPFW? I will be building some routers/firewalls
that will require high performance, and do not want to run into a 
situation where
the firewall is single-threaded (or giant-locked) and becomes a bottleneck.

--Brett Glass