Hacker News Reader

I've recently learnt they are rewriting IPFW (https://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/ipfw2/) to fully take advantage of DFly's features. Eventhough I am not particularly fond of IPFW's syntax and prefer PF it's nice to see that a good SMP friendly firewall is in the works.

View on HN

And see this recent patch [1] from an Oracle developer to make PF SMP proof. It's under review.

[1] http://marc.info/?t=143526332700004&r=1&w=2

"Eventhough I am not particularly fond of IPFW's syntax and prefer PF it's nice to see that a good SMP friendly firewall is in the works."

OpenBSD is slowly working to make PF SMP friendly: http://quigon.bsws.de/papers/2015/asiabsdcon/mgp00033.html

So is NetBSD[0]... exciting times in *BSD-land...

[0] http://www.netbsd.org/~rmind/npf/

npf is not pf, if that's what you're implying (can't tell?)

ah no -- I was only talking about multiprocessor-ifying packet management.

edit: s/package management/packet management/

oh, ok, yes -- this is getting traction in almost every project. It's nice to see this won't be a bottleneck.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com