<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: what makes firewall performance down in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/what-makes-firewall-performance-down/m-p/127203#M18437</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Short Answer: I don't think it will make a meaningful difference in performance.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Long Answer: I assume you would need multiple instances of the first /32 /32 rule as compared to the second rule, which would increase the size of your rulebase.&amp;nbsp; Normally you'd want the rulebase to be as short as possible for optimization purposes, but performance-wise this doesn't matter nearly as much as it used to due to the introduction of column-based matching in R80.10.&amp;nbsp; Technically it would be best to keep your destination columns as specific as possible (especially trying to avoid using "Any" in that field), as column-based matching looks at the Destination column in the first round of matching, and can "throw out" many more non-matching rules in that first round if the Destination columns are as specific as possible, and have far fewer rules to look at during round 2 (source IP) and round 3 (destination port).&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2021 12:16:44 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-08-17T12:16:44Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>what makes firewall performance down</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/what-makes-firewall-performance-down/m-p/127194#M18435</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Team,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;this is just for general information, that from below, what makes firewall performance degrade, and what will be best practice to configure firewall rules:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; Configuring specific /32 source host IP and specific /32 host destination IP&amp;nbsp; or&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt; Configuring specific server subnet /24&amp;nbsp; as source and /32 as destination.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2021 11:25:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/what-makes-firewall-performance-down/m-p/127194#M18435</guid>
      <dc:creator>Roshan_Sinha</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-08-17T11:25:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: what makes firewall performance down</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/what-makes-firewall-performance-down/m-p/127203#M18437</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Short Answer: I don't think it will make a meaningful difference in performance.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Long Answer: I assume you would need multiple instances of the first /32 /32 rule as compared to the second rule, which would increase the size of your rulebase.&amp;nbsp; Normally you'd want the rulebase to be as short as possible for optimization purposes, but performance-wise this doesn't matter nearly as much as it used to due to the introduction of column-based matching in R80.10.&amp;nbsp; Technically it would be best to keep your destination columns as specific as possible (especially trying to avoid using "Any" in that field), as column-based matching looks at the Destination column in the first round of matching, and can "throw out" many more non-matching rules in that first round if the Destination columns are as specific as possible, and have far fewer rules to look at during round 2 (source IP) and round 3 (destination port).&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2021 12:16:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/what-makes-firewall-performance-down/m-p/127203#M18437</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-08-17T12:16:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: what makes firewall performance down</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/what-makes-firewall-performance-down/m-p/127211#M18442</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;adding to&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/597"&gt;@Timothy_Hall&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;, having less rules is always better from the performance perspective. For a single rule, it does not matter if you use a subnet, a group of host objects or just list all those hosts in the rule. That said, you also need to consider your own administrative effort to build this rule.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2021 12:38:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/what-makes-firewall-performance-down/m-p/127211#M18442</guid>
      <dc:creator>_Val_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-08-17T12:38:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

