Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:59:11 -0500
From:      "kevin" <k@kevinkevin.com>
To:        "'Damien Fleuriot'" <ml@my.gd>
Cc:        freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
Subject:   RE: Questions about PF + Multiple gateways + CARP on a public ip network
Message-ID:  <017801cbce1c$5d99fc90$18cdf5b0$@com>
In-Reply-To: <4D5BF6FE.8090704@my.gd>
References:  <00a401cbcd3d$fe313d10$fa93b730$@com> <4D5BD4E6.90605@my.gd> <00cf01cbcdf2$d54f6100$7fee2300$@com> <4D5BF6FE.8090704@my.gd>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>If you only have one gateway, then you have nothing to worry about for
>this part.

They provide a gateway address for each subnet they allocate to me -- which
probably is assigned to the same device for them, but I would need to
establish these rules in my freebsd firewall , correct?


>If you expect a lot of traffic, I recommend you do NOT use pfsync to
>synchronize existing sessions on the backup firewall.

Why not? Is this a generally accepted practice not to use pfsync because of
this? How much traffic is too much? The firewalls should average about 5,000
- 10,000 states on any given day, afaik.

Im more worried about failover than I am about states being kept, but it
would be nice to utilize pfsync if it wouldn't be too risky.



Thanks,

Kevin





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?017801cbce1c$5d99fc90$18cdf5b0$>