Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 27 Jan 2007 15:49:25 +0100
From:      Volker <volker@vwsoft.com>
To:        "Kevin K." <freebsd-pf@magma.ca>
Cc:        freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: RE: PF in kernel or as a module
Message-ID:  <45BB6675.2040609@vwsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <000301c74153$30d86ed0$92894c70$@ca>
References:  <45B684BD.8090706@gmail.com>	<200701240153.30454.max@love2party.net>	<45BA0815.80708@gmail.com> <000301c74153$30d86ed0$92894c70$@ca>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/23/-58 20:59, Kevin K. wrote:
> I'm curious if there has been some benchmarking done to compare the two
> methods of enabling PF.
> 
> The security debate could be argued to be circumstantial, but I'd like to
> hear from people who use it in production via loaded module, as my only
> experience with PF is building it into the kernel.

I'm managing a bunch of machines all using pf (5.x, 6.x) as a kld
module. I never experienced any problems. As I want to have b/w
control I've compiled ALTQ into the kernel but kldload'ing pf (don't
ask why, it's probably historic from the 5.2 days).

Never done any benchmarking but on the other side I never
experienced any performance problems.

Greetings,

Volker



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45BB6675.2040609>