Re: [Snort-users] bpf filter versus "config ignore_ports"

Hi Elof,

> Which is better for performance, filter out unwanted traffic using a
> bpf filter or using the configuration statement "ignore_ports"?
>
> I'm guessing that bpf is better. So when should one use "ignore_ports"?

the fastest version would be the bpf. But bpf rules can get very
complex with the number of filtered entries.

So the ignore_ports are a little bit more user friendly.

And since one of the first things snort does is to decode the
ports it will not be much slower than bpf at all. If you really
finds here a difference than you will have a problem at all...

Best regards

Dirk


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Snort-users mailing list
Snort-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/...fo/snort-users
Snort-users list archive:
http://www.geocrawler.com/redir-sf.p...st=snort-users