On Saturday 08 February 2003 05:40 am, Robert Fox wrote:

> When the firewall is enabled - the performance is dramatically slower
> (seems to go in bursts) - I would expect the firewall to be slower due
> the packet inspection overhead - but this seems VERY dramatic as far as
> the performance difference.

First, I would strongly suggest getting a cheapo machine to be the firewall 
and have it separate from the machine that's serving files to your LAN. Not 
only is it more secure, you'll get much better LAN performance as local 
packets won't be going through the firewall. At one time I had my main server 
machine doing the job (a Celeron 300 - and at the time, it was not yet 
obsolete), but I offloaded the job to a crappy 486sx and my LAN performance 
improved.

If you can't find an old machine, or don't want the hassle of building a 
scaled-down Linux install for it (plug for Mandrake SNF seems appropriate 
here), then you'll need to seriously consider your iptables configuration. If 
your "output" and "input" chains are just long strings of rules, every packet 
has to go through every rule to see if it will be allowed. A better solution 
is to set up a few chains - laninput, lanoutput, inetinput, inetoutput for 
example, and have your main rules just jump to one of these chains based on 
which interface the packet is coming from/going to. Then, your lan rules can 
be super simple, and only your packets going to/coming from the Internet have 
to pass through a strict set of rules. This should make a difference in your 
LAN performance.

I'd offer up an example, but my server has been reinstalled long since I had 
it doing the firewalling job, so I don't have my old rulesets anymore. You 
can probably find a good example on the web somewhere.

-- 
Brian Smith


Reply via email to