On 27 May 98, at 18:09, Doug Ingraham wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 1998, Todd M. Jagger wrote:
> > 3) What is the impact on the pm's performance by putting these filters in
> > place, assuming that the list of filters is not huge but maybe 25 or so
> > entries? Is using a Choicenet server a better option than having the
> > filters on the pm itself?
>
> I stopped using choicenet because it logs bogus error messages and
> livingston acted like it was something I was doing wrong. On active
D´oh...I use Choicenet for guest access, where I maintain a list of allowed Web sites for
them. It works flawlessly on a PM3 (3.8b15)...perhaps you tried ORs or PM2s, the latter
are getting more and more overloaded with the new features...
ComOS´s filter parsing is very fast. I had filters with more than 50 rules on an IRX-211
between the Ethernets, and discovered no significant latencies after applying the filters.
Please note that filters are parsed sequentially. Each packet will be matched with the
appropriate filter starting at rule 1. So put rules concerning critical traffic at the
head of the list, if possible...
Frank
best regards,
-- Frank M. Heinzius MMS Communication AG mailto:frimp@mms.de Eiffestrasse 598 http://www.mms.de 20537 Hamburg, Germany Phone: +49 40 211105-0 Fax: +49 40 210 32 210 -- all kind of spam to this email address forbidden -- - To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message. Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>