On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 12:53 -0400, David Nalley wrote: > >-----Original Message----- > >From: centos-bounces at centos.org on behalf of Craig White > >Sent: Wed 8/16/2006 11:22 AM > >To: CentOS mailing list > >Subject: [CentOS] proxy server - ipcop vs CentOS > > > >I have purchased a used Compaq DL360 which I was going to use as a proxy > >server. Presently, we are using a cheap box with ipcop which is working > >fine but it didn't have much RAM (64MB), etc. IPCop itself doesn't need much. I have it installed on 3 machines, "lowest" is an AMD 5x86 100MHz (equiv to a 486DX?) with 32MB. A DX/2 66MHz aptiva with 32MB and a 200MHz Pentium with 64MB (I know, so wastful... just for now). The slowest (66MHz) with 3C509 half-duplex ISA NICS gets 477K bytes/sec off my cable modem. The fastest gets me almost 700KB (670, 680, ... depending on source site). But I don't run anything but IPCop on those units. I have no idea what will happen if you start running other services on the firewall. > > > >This new box we will want to run squid and perhaps dansguardian for > >filtering (this is a non-profit company) and I'm wondering if I should > >just put ipcop on it or would it be smarter/better to install CentOS 4, > >squid and I see Dag has dansguardian package which suggests that I might > >get more and better options from this. > > > >Anyone have opinions on ipcop vs. CentOS I like IPCop a lot. It's stable, supports several different configurations and is priced right and runs on about anything. > > > >Craig > <snip> -- Bill -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060816/31d4afc2/attachment-0005.sig>