Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:23:54 -0700
From:      "Chris H" <bsd-lists@BSDforge.com>
To:        "Kurt Jaeger" <lists@opsec.eu>
Cc:        "FreeBSD PF List" <freebsd-pf@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Is there an upper limit to PF's tables?
Message-ID:  <4c0deb48c16c7dea04df7a85b1e1893a@udns.ultimatedns.net>
In-Reply-To: <20180618102147.GN4028@home.opsec.eu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:21:47 +0200 "Kurt Jaeger" <lists@opsec=2Eeu> said

> Hi!
>=20
> > > So loading all entries in to empty table works fine, but reloading=20
> > > didn't work=2E
> > Sorry=2E Looks like I might be coming to the party a little late=2E But I'm
> > currently running a 9=2E3 box that runs as a IP (service) filter for much
> > of a network=2E While I've patched the box well enough to keep it safe to
> > continue running=2E I am reluctant to up(grade|date) it to 11, or CURRENT=
,
> > based on some of the information related to topics like this thread=2E
> > Currently, the 9=2E3 box maintains some 18 million entries *just* within
> > the SPAM related table=2E The other tables contain no less that 1 million=
=2E
>=20
> > As it stands I have *no* trouble loading pf(4) with all of the tables
> > totaling some 20+ million entries, *even* when the BOX is working with
> > as little 4Gb ram=2E
> > Has something in pf(4) changed, since 9=2E3 that would now prevent me
> > from continuing to use my current setup, and tables?
>=20
> Well, if you plan to upgrade, I'd suggest you do some tests,
> like dumping those tables and loading them on a new box=2E
>=20
> At all our installations we did use PF in 9=2Ex times and
> had no problems to move to 11=2Ex=2E
Thanks for the reply, Kurt=2E
That's good advice, indeed=2E As that was pretty much my "game plan"=2E
But recently I've seen a few entries on the list, and a few pr(1)'s
regarding the inability to start pf(1), because the tables were too large=2E
Whereas I hadn't heard anyone mention it in the past=2E So it seemed prudent
to ask=2E :-)

Thanks again, Kurt!

--Chris
>=20
> --=20
> pi@opsec=2Eeu            +49 171 3101372                    2 years to go !





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4c0deb48c16c7dea04df7a85b1e1893a>