Re: [WinMac] NAT (IP Masq) vs. Proxy
Tim Scoff(casper[at]nb.net)
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 22:16:01 -0500
I know that this is beating a dead horse, but I prefer NAT
through a hardware box. I bought mine for less than $500 and it
never crashes and it is extremely reliable and stable. I can (and
do) administer it from both Windows computers and Macs, and it gives
me easier internet access than MS Proxy Server or WinGate did. Those
products require you to configure your computer differently to use
the server than to dial up. With the NAT box the settings are the
same all around.
At 11:27 AM -0800 2/18/99, Darryl Lee wrote:
> Not to belabor the point, but i found a couple of nice tables
> comparing NAT and Proxy solutions to sharing a connection.
> (Now granted, they're really kind of "selling" NAT, but still,
> they make some good points.)
>
> http://www.sygate.com/products.html
> http://www.vicomsoft.com/solutions/proxytable.html
>
> And to re-iterate, the big players in the NAT field are:
>
> SyGate (Windows): http://www.sygate.com/
> Vicom Internet Gateway (Mac): http://www.vicomsoft.com/
> IPNetRouter (Mac): http://www.sustworks.com/
> IP Masquerading (Linux): http://ipmasq.cjb.net/
>
> And i recently found out about another contender, NAT1000.
>
> But it appears that they just got bought by Microsoft, (so it may be
> "rolled in" to a future version of Windows?), and they're no longer
> selling the product: http://www.nevod.com/
>
> And one of the big players in the proxy market (aside from M$) is
> WinGate: http://www.wingate.com/
>
> And in fact, lots of people _love_ WinGate.
>
> --
> Darryl Lee <lee@darryl.com> | Geek? Who me? <http://www.darryl.com>
>
> * Windows-MacOS Cooperation List *
Tim Scoff, MCSE
casper@nb.net
<http://www.nb.net/~casper/>
Microsoft Windows NT 4.0. The world's only fully buzzword compliant
Operating System.
* Windows-MacOS Cooperation List *
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2
on Thu Feb 18 1999 - 19:18:12 PST
|
|