RE: IP-Cop Firerwall was RE: [PCTECH] I learned somethingaboutcertificatesandencrypting filesystems the other day ...

["Bob Crothers" <bob2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mark,

ALL routers and firewall appliances are computers.  And they all
have an impact on throughput. 

But that is also why I was advocating using more hardware then
necessary.  But, keep in mind that you can buy a brand new
current system that would be way over kill for $500 or less.

And for T1 or below, a 400mhz system is probably more than
adequate. The 800mhz+ box I was saying is overkill.  But given
the cost of these systems, why not overkill?  These sort of boxes
on a DSL line will have a very negligible impact on throughput.  

Is IPCop the solution for all setups?  Well of course not!  But
for a typical T1/Cable/DSL small to medium business?  Yes. In
most cases it is a nice fit.  And probably for ALL home
broadband.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pctech-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:pctech-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Villa
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 1:56 PM
> To: 'PC Technical Discussion for iSeries Users'
> Subject: RE: IP-Cop Firerwall was RE: [PCTECH] I learned 
> somethingaboutcertificatesandencrypting filesystems the other
day ...
> 
> 
> ~~~Connections?  Do you mean VPN connections or NAtting or port
> ~~~forwarding or
> ~~~... A 233 MHz computer should handle a LOT more than 6 NAT
> ~~~connections.
> ~~~Should do more than 6 VPNs also.
> 
> I don't get it. If I understand you all correctly, IP COP 
> runs on a computer
> and bandwidth travels through it.
> An older or newer computer would surely limit bandwidth, more 
> so to six
> connections.
> I think it is fair to say the older computer could be the 
> slowest link of
> the network.
> Granted, my cable modem restricts me to X. But my Linksys 
> device should not
> cause any further performance degradation.
> And if a really fast IP COP box would yield more effective 
> bandwidth beyond
> an appliance, that would be an added plus to the enhancement 
> of security.
> 
> And so my thought is the $2000 dollar Cisco appliance may be 
> well worth it
> if you need a specific security without degradation.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.
> 
> -Mark
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the PC Technical Discussion for iSeries Users 
> (PcTech) mailing list
> To post a message email: PcTech@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/pctech
> or email: PcTech-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/pctech.
>