Which ICS software do you use and recommend?

bupkus

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2000
3,816
0
76
Which ICS software do you use and recommend?

Please mention the OS you're using it on for the server and the client.
 

FUBAR

Senior member
Oct 11, 1999
618
0
0
Linux 2.4.x with iptables. 2x times with 2-4 puters.

One is running on a p2-266 and the other on a k6-2 350. Both also serve as ftp/web/file servers. Mine also is a mail server.
 

sohcrates

Diamond Member
Sep 19, 2000
7,949
0
0
I just run NAT on my win2k server box...but i've setup ICS in the past with no problems...can't say that any third party software really has too many advantages over plain old ICS
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
Wingate is a great tool. Plenty of script kiddiots use open wingate connections to flood IRC channels and users. I recommend you *DONT* use wingate! I have heard good things about sygate, but I have never used it myself. Ive got OpenBSD :D
 

Tiger

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,312
0
0
I don't simply because a hardware solution is always better than software.
I use a Linksys router to share my cable connection amongst three computers.
My paranoia is high enough to run Zone alram on all of them behind the NAT firewall in the router.
One of the boxes on the net is a dual boot with W2K and Linux. I run Firestarter on the linux side to setup iptables.
 

bupkus

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2000
3,816
0
76
FoBoT,
Thanks for the links. It seems that clarkconnect is in beta. The Freesco looks interesting. There are other linux solutions as well. Have you tried Smoothwall?

Edit: I think I'll give Freesco a try first.
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0


<< I don't simply because a hardware solution is always better than software. >>



I disagree.
 

bupkus

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2000
3,816
0
76
which of these are free for < 3 connections?

I can't find a home version of Sygate.
 

Nothinman

Elite Member
Sep 14, 2001
30,672
0
0
I don't simply because a hardware solution is always better than software.

That hardware runs some form of software, the main difference is you have a lot less control over the 'hardware' solution.

I also recommend a Linux or BSD based firewall.
 

Woodie

Platinum Member
Mar 27, 2001
2,747
0
0
You need an "other" choice in your poll.

I use the inJoy dialer/suite for NAT. Didn't bother w/ the Firewall option, although it is available. Cost ~$50 (US).

On a 486, running OS/2 Warp. Uptime >3 months. (I had to take it down to replace the PSU)
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0


<< I don't simply because a hardware solution is always better than software.
I use a Linksys router to share my cable connection amongst three computers.
My paranoia is high enough to run Zone alram on all of them behind the NAT firewall in the router.
One of the boxes on the net is a dual boot with W2K and Linux. I run Firestarter on the linux side to setup iptables.
>>



I also have to disagree. In fact, "hardware" solutions like the Linksys and Cisco DSL routers often run software that is very limited compared to what you can do with IPTables on a Linux box (nothing against BSD, just never used it). I've been using my Cisco DSL router for a long time, and in a few weeks of using IPTables I can already do more. The only benefit from a dedicated router comes from the fact that it doesn't do anything else besides route packets, but you can set up a reliable (and much more powerful) Linux box to be the same dedicated solution.
 

ttn1

Senior member
Oct 24, 2000
680
0
0
I run smoothwall at work. It works very well. The interface is very easy for the newbie and as long as you have pentium or better hardware with PCI nics, the install is a snap. We have it installed on some old 486/66 machines with ISA nics, and that took us about an hour to figure out the setting and get it up and running.

I use linux router project at home, mainly because my router doesn't have a harddrive. I plan on upgrading to the Oxygen release before to long. FREESCO is very nice as well.

EDIT: As for reliability and configurability, I choose my LRP box every time. It has been running for 2 years now with a week of downtime. The week of downtime was while I moved into my new house. Iptables or for that matter ipchains give you way more control than any low end "hardware" router.

And now for the final rant. Setting up your own router gives you hands on training into what goes into securing your network. This is a good thing for everyone. With a hardware router, you really get the feeling that it is all plug and play. This is not a good thing for network security.
 

bupkus

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2000
3,816
0
76
Ok, I love the idea of using an old pc for my own system, but right now I have someone who has 2 PCs and wants to share a broadband connection.

For now he's using ZoneAlarm basic for security on his W2K machine.
The W2K Pro is wired to both the modem and the Win98.

So, please, which ICS software solution would you use?
 

Skaven

Senior member
Oct 18, 1999
835
0
0
Another vote for FreeSCO.

I've used it for 2 years to host anywhere from 3-20 computers with no problems or lag. I want to get more into linux, so I'm converting an old Pentium machine to RH7.2 w/ Apache & IPChains to host in addition to route. Once you get your hardware (IRQ, DMA etc..) figured out for your NICs - FreeSCO is a breeze!

Current setup:
Comcast Cable hooked up to my 3com cable modem
10baseT connection from Cable to ISA NIC in FreeSCO box
10baseT connection from FreeSCO to 10/100 Intel switch
2 100baseT full duplex connections to switch (Win2K and new Linux box)
10baseT Orinoco Wireless AP
3 Wireless connections for laptops and desktop in my room

No problems with this old 486/33 and two ISA NICs running FreeSCO.