From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 14 20:49:50 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C093106564A; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 20:49:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=julian=1973cfe30@elischer.org) Received: from smtp-outbound.ironport.com (smtp-outbound.ironport.com [63.251.108.112]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03F568FC08; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 20:49:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=julian=1973cfe30@elischer.org) Received: from jelischer-laptop.sfo.ironport.com (HELO julian-mac.elischer.org) ([10.251.22.38]) by smtp-outbound.ironport.com with ESMTP; 14 Nov 2008 12:49:50 -0800 Message-ID: <491DE46D.8070205@elischer.org> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:49:49 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Macintosh/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Barton References: <491CD94F.3020207@elischer.org> <20081114133913.K70117@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <491D375D.1070809@elischer.org> <20081114211043.W54700@delplex.bde.org> <491DC07B.6070304@elischer.org> <491DDA7F.1040004@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <491DDA7F.1040004@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Net , ipfw@FreeBSD.org, Ian Smith Subject: Re: rc.firewall quick change X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 20:49:50 -0000 Doug Barton wrote: > Julian Elischer wrote: >> I think the table is faster for mor ethan about 8 addresses (so we >> are borderline) but it's be hard to test.. You however use two rules >> so that would be slower. > > I'm not a firewall expert so I won't comment on the specifics but I do > want to say that as a general rule "it works + fast/efficient" is MUCH > more important for default settings than "it works really well" or "it > works + more features." For better or worse we live in a world where > most users don't read the manuals, and that includes the ones running > "benchmarks" with default settings. I think the change is better from the point of view that it is easier to read (for me) and behaves better. > > OTOH I do think it would be entirely appropriate to include a "better" > example commented out next to the "fast" default. I take a similar > approach with the default named.conf and have had good feedback from > users who appreciate pointers to more information when they actually > do get curious. > > > hth, > > Doug >