Firewall Wizards mailing list archives

RE: Comparisons between Router ACLs and Firewalls


From: "Bill James" <bubbagates () comcast net>
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:30:16 -0500

This is exactly what I saw on this baby 1720...Under stress it is so low
on RAM that it would not display the running config...rather it would
log a memory error to syslog

I agree with Paul also...

Care must be taken in chosing the correct device for the site involved
and it's intended purpose and it's configuration, All must be proper for
the intended purpose

An underconfigured (both hardware and software configuration) device can
kill you quickly.
 
Bill James
 

-----Original Message-----
From: firewall-wizards-admin () honor icsalabs com 
[mailto:firewall-wizards-admin () honor icsalabs com] On Behalf 
Of Wes Noonan
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 7:09 PM
To: 'Paul Robertson'; 'Marcus J. Ranum'
Cc: 'Bill James'; 'David Pick'; firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
Subject: RE: [fw-wiz] Comparisons between Router ACLs and Firewalls 

One of the problems that we had when I was working for a 
company that made network performance management tools was 
dealing with this exact issue.
Because every packet size is variable in most networks (ATM, 
etc. are obvious exceptions), the impact that many things 
have on the performance of a network device becomes almost 
impossible to make a general baseline statement about, much 
to the chagrin of the sales force. This is so true that Cisco 
(and most other vendors) typically refer to a set 64K packet 
size in the small print on all of their performance metrics, 
although this is obviously an impossible number to achieve in 
the real world.

The obvious performance impact on a router with ACLs has to 
do with the fact that every packet now must be processed by 
the router before it can be forwarded. This also requires the 
router to be able to queue and buffer the packet during 
processing. I seriously doubt that anyone could produce 
numbers more accurate than "In my environment, generally 
speaking" or "in an absolutely controlled environment, this 
is what we saw". I agree with Paul here though that the when 
you start trying to do things to the router itself you can 
really see the performance impact some of these other things 
have. I can't count how many routers I have seen reboot when 
trying to show the running config because the router was 
under too much stress for whatever reason (often times BGP 
routers that are skimpy on RAM).

Thanks.

Wes Noonan
mailinglists () wjnconsulting com
http://www.wjnconsulting.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: firewall-wizards-admin () honor icsalabs com 
[mailto:firewall-wizards- admin () honor icsalabs com] On 
Behalf Of Paul 
Robertson
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 17:40
To: Marcus J. Ranum
Cc: Bill James; 'David Pick'; firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
Subject: RE: [fw-wiz] Comparisons between Router ACLs and Firewalls

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004, Marcus J. Ranum wrote:

I've never found any good studies of ACL performance. Do you have 
any references you can point us to?

Cisco used to publish some "can do $foo access lists 
without impact" 
stuff with certain models.  If we're lucky, maybe Brian 
will see this 
and post some pointers.

The not-normal-ACL stuff carries a heavy penalty - as the 
extended ACL 
stuff does if you want silicon switching- I did a whole look at the 
switching methods versus performance stuff a while back 
when writing 
TruSecure's router essential config guide- and for almost 
everything 
(AIR, there were two cards on one model where things sucked) you 
didn't get into trouble until you had more rules than 
sense.  I think 
I left most of the switching mode stuff out of the document in the 
end, because it just confused people.

Now, send packets *to* the router, or send packets where the router 
has to go to CPU land to process them, and things get significantly 
different (which is why you really want to ACL off your 
routers from 
the rest of the
world.)

Paul

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----
---
Paul D. Robertson      "My statements in this message are personal
opinions
proberts () patriot net      which may have no basis 
whatsoever in fact."
probertson () trusecure com Director of Risk Assessment TruSecure 
Corporation _______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards

_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards

_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards


Current thread: