On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 12:22:19AM +0100, Michiel van Baak wrote:
On 22:12, Tue 07 Nov 06, C?dric Berger wrote:
There is no way it can work on a 32-bit i386 system.
This kind of pointer limitation is the first reason why
ppl move to 64-bit systems, so that might be worth testing
on a
Michael K. Smith - Adhost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We are looking at pulling in a listing of about 70,000 IP entries (most
of them are hosts, not subnets) into a PF Table. Is there any hard
limitation to the configuration size or ability to parse through
something that large?
The limits
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 06:08:52PM +, Paul Pruett wrote:
A nominal i386 computer with only a meg of ram
without limit changes would not load it.
Neither would a stock GENERIC kernel on any architecture. The reason is
that those 600+MB of table entries are allocated from kernel memory. And
Paul Pruett wrote:
Thats over 3 million lines, wow. So would that be over 3 million entries
and with the previous example 3,112,763 * 216 = 672 MB
That math correct? And add the smaller spews list, korean china lists
to that also. So how well does pf work with CBL?
There is no way it can
On 22:12, Tue 07 Nov 06, Cédric Berger wrote:
There is no way it can work on a 32-bit i386 system.
This kind of pointer limitation is the first reason why
ppl move to 64-bit systems, so that might be worth testing
on a (maybe tuned) amd64 kernel.
How about the core 2 duo and xeon intel
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 08:28:00PM +0100, Daniel Hartmeier wrote:
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 06:08:52PM +, Paul Pruett wrote:
A nominal i386 computer with only a meg of ram
without limit changes would not load it.
Neither would a stock GENERIC kernel on any architecture. The reason is
Hello All:
We are looking at pulling in a listing of about 70,000 IP entries (most
of them are hosts, not subnets) into a PF Table. Is there any hard
limitation to the configuration size or ability to parse through
something that large?
Regards,
Mike
On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 02:21:58PM -0800, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
We are looking at pulling in a listing of about 70,000 IP entries (most
of them are hosts, not subnets) into a PF Table.
There is essentially no difference between a host and a subnet as far as
tables are concerned in
On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 02:21:58PM -0800, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
We are looking at pulling in a listing of about 70,000 IP entries (most
of them are hosts, not subnets) into a PF Table. Is there any hard
limitation to the configuration size or ability to parse through
something
