It's effectively - in security speak - a DMZ (demilitarized zone) no?

Fil

Minh Van Le wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but having two firewalls is better than one.

One for the DSL modem that is exposed to the internet, and then a separate
firewall for the internal lan that is only exposed to the DSL firewall is
better than firewalling everything from 1 box. It may delay a compromise and
make tracking logs easier.


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Chris D.
Sent: Sunday, 1 June 2003 19:10
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SLUG] home server on adsl; advice


This one time, at band camp, Amanda Wynne wrote:


I'm looking at getting an Alcatel Pro. Currently running a P120

with Freesco


via dialup.

I'd recomend the DSL-300 from D-Link. There it maintains the authentication and you just plugin a cat5 crossover to your system. On the system it's connected to, you just use dhcp to configure the IP address on it.


What I'm thinking of doing, if it's possible (this was going to

be my next


question) is change the Freesco box to bridge mode, feeding the

alcatel, with


my web server (yet another box) hanging off the alcatel. That

way my Lan is


effectively double-firewalled.

'double-firewalled' is really not going to mean much.


I refuse to say free-->SCO<-- is a good idea.

Cheers,
Chris
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug





--
Phil Scarratt
Draxsen Technologies
IT Contractor/Consultant
0403 53 12 71

--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug

Reply via email to