Re: IPcop v Smoothwall

Andy_at_nospam.co.uk
Date: 10/15/03 

Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 08:32:41 +0200

cxyber <ya@no_spam.ev.er> wrote:

>"Andy@nospam.co.uk" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
>news:2u6oovktdc26lgp3g685phf7nq6ddthr7l@4ax.com:
>
>> I have looked at these both and am going to put one or the other on a
>> spare PC with 3 NICS.
>>
>> I know that IPcop was based on Smoothwall originally but has anyone
>> with hands on experience got any advice on which is easier to use.
>>
>> I am a Linux Newbie but not a networking newbie so it is really the
>> setting up that I am wondering about.
>>
>> I want to use this to replace my Netgear FR318 which is fine but the
>> upgrade from 8-20 users is IMHO unjustifiably expensive.
>>
>> TIA
>>
>> Andy
>
>Im a sys admin for a company running more than 25 various PC's.
>I have used both smoothwall and IpCop. Both are very good, however
>what made me use IpCop was a matter of future directions.
>Smoothwall is becomming more and more commercial and full of
>there propoganda. I dont want to find my firewall no longer
>supported due to the company going commercial. This I belive
>is where Smoothwall is heading once they have used us to beta
>test there product. Ipcop has a different outlook and I belive
>this will result in many more years of updates and support from
>there camp. I have been running Ipcop at home and work for over
>2 years its easy, cheap and VERY powerfull. Not once as a sysadmin
>have I lost sleep due to someone breaching my networks. In all
>fairness though both have there merrits and faults, both can be
>highly customised and both are very good. I use my Ipcop to provide
>Internet connectivity through broadband with clients useing Pc's
>from Win95b through to Winxp pro and SCO. Never had any issues with
>any OS. It just works a treat. I'm using a P11 400 with 128mgs of ram.
>3gig HDD mostly for log storage.
>
>Chears

Thanks for that, this is the same specs that I was thinking of using as I
have a couple spare.

Andy

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Smoothwall vs IPcop
    ... Hard to learn but easy to manage but then IPCOP and Smoothwall ... commercial use iptables). ... chris at lowth dot sea oh em. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: IPCop or SmoothWall? Which Is/Will Be Active?
    ... >>I wanted to know if the SmoothWall Freebie version is dead based ... >>version left off, IPCop picked it up. ... > SmoothWall GPL is far from being dead, ... the GPL version 0.99 has still been patched/fixed and there ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Smoothwall
    ... > So you would recommend IPcop over Smoothwall then? ... Definately IPCop ... With SmoothWall you can install the patches and it ... Outgoing mail has been scanned for virus infection and, to the best of my knowledge, is Virus Free. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Linux Router with Firewall
    ... >> cares to point out where these fees are mentioned, ... > I've never configured ipcop, but you've sparked my curiosity about how ... > it compares to smoothwall in terms of ease of administration. ... reason for the idea of a GPL Linux Firewall Distribution of such ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: IPCop or SmoothWall? Which Is/Will Be Active?
    ... >I wanted to know if the SmoothWall Freebie version is dead based ... >version left off, IPCop picked it up. ... SmoothWall GPL is far from being dead, ... the GPL version 0.99 has still been patched/fixed and there ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
Loading