From owner-freebsd-ipfw Mon Dec 24 7:34:15 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from jasper.nighttide.net (jasper.nighttide.net [216.220.229.89]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A357F37B41B for ; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 07:34:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (darren@localhost) by jasper.nighttide.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fBNMIpc00714 for ; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:18:51 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from darren@nighttide.net) Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:18:51 -0500 (EST) From: Darren Henderson To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: silly question... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Any processing efficiences in gathering up ports in a single rule as opposed to one rule per each port? In other words is something like this.... ipfw add allow tcp from any to hostname 22,25,53,80,443 setup better then ipfw add allow tcp from any to hostname 443 setup ipfw add allow tcp from any to hostname 80 setup ipfw add allow tcp from any to hostname 53 setup ipfw add allow tcp from any to hostname 25 setup ipfw add allow tcp from any to hostname 22 setup ... in terms of "speed". Obviously it makes the config file somewhat messier... ______________________________________________________________________ Darren Henderson darren@nighttide.net Help fight junk e-mail, visit http://www.cauce.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message