From: Roman Mamedov <rm@romanrm.net>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc: "jwollrath@web.de" <jwollrath@web.de>,
"wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com" <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wg-quick: linux: add support for nft and prefer it
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:12:15 +0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191210221215.56c2f30d@natsu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9pdqq23OXNPHLT-YyXCKTVTKJNyfz9D+Q0jADAN=BDhnA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 17:54:49 +0100
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> iptables rules and nftables rules can co-exist just fine, without any
> translation needed. Indeed if your iptables is symlinked to
> iptables-nft, then you'll insert nftables rules when you try to insert
> iptables rules, but it really doesn't matter much either way (AFAIK).
> I figured I'd prefer nftables over iptables if available because I
> presume, without any metrics, that nftables is probably faster and
> slicker or something.
nftables is slower than iptables across pretty much every metric[1][2]. It
only wins where a pathological case is used for the iptables counterpart (e.g.
tons of single IPs as individual rules and without ipset). It is a disaster
that it is purported to be the iptables replacement, just for the syntax and
non-essential whistles such as updating rules in place or something. And
personally I don't prefer the new syntax either. It's the systemd and
pulseaudio story all over again, where something more convoluted, less reliable
and of lower quality is passed for a replacement of stuff that actually worked,
but was deemed "unsexy" and arbitrarly declared as deprecated.
[1] http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1212650/FULLTEXT01.pdf
[2] https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2017/04/11/benchmarking-nftables/
--
With respect,
Roman
_______________________________________________
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-10 17:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-10 15:48 Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 16:52 ` Jordan Glover
2019-12-10 16:54 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 17:05 ` Jordan Glover
2019-12-10 17:11 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 17:12 ` Roman Mamedov [this message]
2019-12-10 17:28 ` Davide Depau
2019-12-10 17:33 ` Matthias Urlichs
2019-12-10 17:36 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 18:00 ` Roman Mamedov
2019-12-10 18:58 ` Jordan Glover
2019-12-10 19:15 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 20:30 ` Jordan Glover
2019-12-10 20:34 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 21:56 ` Vasili Pupkin
2019-12-10 22:09 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 22:27 ` Vasili Pupkin
2019-12-12 11:21 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-12-10 17:31 ` Vasili Pupkin
2019-12-10 17:38 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191210221215.56c2f30d@natsu \
--to=rm@romanrm.net \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=jwollrath@web.de \
--cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).