ramon, as you might already know, masquerading occurs at a lower level than squid (because squid is an appplication layer service, while masquerading is a network layer service). these two technologies offer different services, and a comparison between them would be pointless.
however, like how tiger has mentioned, it depends on what you actually want to let the clients do. if you want to allow them (the clients) to be able to send and recieve arbitrary packets to and from the internet, then masquerading is fine. however, if you just want them to be able to surf the net, then disabling masquerading and putting in squid instead would be a wise decision. squid allows you to cache the data the clients are requesting, allowing for a more pleasant browsing experience (expecially if they go to the same site over and over). it also allows you to find out which sites they have been going to, as well as how much they use the web service available to them. you can gather per client statistics, and do something useful with it. however, it all boils down to what you really want them to be able to do. a mix would be nice, and as how tiger has mentioned, you have a lot of alternatives and cases. HTH. On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 21:58, Ramon de los Reyes wrote: > good day, > > we have been using masquerading to allow our > workstation to surf the internet. my friend suggested > that we should use squid instead. > > my question is which is better? any point / link to > explain the difference/advantage is highly > appreciated. > > thanks, > > ramon -- Dean Michael Berris http://mikhailberis.blogspot.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] +63 919 8720686 -- Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph . To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug . Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie
