>socks (version5) pros:
>can use advanced authentication (login/kerberos) for access.
>more sophisticated logging.
>doesn't need dns resolution on the clients side.
I'd add:
- "more secure" since traffic doesn't PASS through the
network
- Cachine is possible for better WWW performance
Cons:
- requires SOCKS-compatible clients
>ipmasq pros:
>presumably more services supported (as clients don't have to be coded for it)
>done in the kernel so is faster?
>actively supported and promoted (NEC states they don't care much about
>the reference implementation).
Cons:
- requires an MTU of 1500
--David
.----------------------------------------------------------------------------.
| David A. Ranch - Linux/Networking/PC hardware [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
!---- ----!
`----- For more detailed info, see http://www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~dranch -----'
_______________________________________________
Masq maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://tiffany.indyramp.com/mailman/listinfo/masq
Admin requests can be handled by web (above) or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
