On 2014-07-21 09:57, bycn82 wrote:
> There is no doubt that PF is a really good firewall, But we should noticed 
> that there is an ipfw which is originally from FreeBSD while PF is from 
> OpenBSD.
> If there is a requirement that PF can meet but ipfw cannot, then I think it 
> is better to improve the ipfw. But if you just like the PF style, then I 
> think choose OpenBSD is the better solution. Actually OpenBSD is another 
> really good operating system. 
> Like myself, I like CentOS and ipfw, so no choice :)

The only thing I've really found lacking in IPFW is the NAT
implementation. Specifically, when trying to do port-forwarding. All of
the rules have to go in the single 'ipfw nat' rule, and it makes it
cumbersome to manage.

Allan Jude

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to