Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 16:08:31 +0100 From: Bart Matthaei <bart@dreamflow.nl> To: Josh Snyder <nightrav@netnitco.net> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NAT / Firewall Question Message-ID: <20020327160830.A75406@heresy.dreamflow.nl> In-Reply-To: <00e801c1d59d$2b463e10$4400000a@nitco.com>; from nightrav@netnitco.net on Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 08:39:14AM -0600 References: <00e801c1d59d$2b463e10$4400000a@nitco.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] > I am going to be setting up a box to do NAT with my Ameritech ADSL (Alcatel > SpeedTouch USB modem) and I was wondering if there was any reason that I > should use FreeBSD with ipfw/ipfilter ( I don't really know the difference) > rather than Linux with iptables? I fully admit that I haven't really > researched the two options throughly and I've only setup a very basic one > rule NAT configuration for my friend. I was hoping that you all may have > some insight as to why or if FreeBSD makes a better NAT / Firewall box. It doesn't. It's just a question of what your used to. I like the freebsd "feel" a lot better compared to linux. Same thing when it comes down to ipfw/ipf versus iptables. iptables has the same functionality, but is in my eyes, too complex, when you compare it to ipfw/ipf. There used to be a difference in performance between linux and (free)bsd when it comes down to firewalling and routing, but with the birth of the 2.4 kernel and iptables, this difference has vanished. B. -- Bart Matthaei bart@dreamflow.nl Eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow they may make it illegal. [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8oeBugcc6pR+tCegRAifwAKCOwnXsNctWO/JypUBVhzkVywQScwCfe2v/ WAF1rZxTS/BMpcvFeS+j9gw= =atKV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020327160830.A75406>