Which is best ... Linux box or Hub with built-in router?

[NucleusWDS]

This has always BUGGED me ....

 

[randomlinh]

freesco

much cheaper and does the job that's if you got a 486 layin around.

 

[spidey07]

Much better and does the job?

That has to go to the hub with a built-in router. Easier management plus packet chipset designed for doing just that. Sure a linux box will do it as well, but so will any operating system. In any case a "software router" will always get it's a$$ kicked by any piece of network equipment.

Oh, don't forget much more features.

spidey

 

[Russ]

Both. Actually, several of each.

Russ, NCNE

 

[Shuxclams]

Actually a well configured Linux IPMASQ will allow you to do much, much more as well as give you options for security and logging of every port to "check" for bad connection attempts. Russ said both, that is true as well as long as you plan on running "simple" services through the router, then again the routers behind a linux IPMASQ could also create DMZ's, its a loaded question, but for overall performance and security and flexability I would choose IPMASQ 98 times out of 100.







SHUX

 

[cavingjan]

I've always been a big fan of hardware routers over software ones. Here's something to consider: Do you really want another computer left on for 24/7? In some areas, electric bills are a big deal and that hardware router is not pulling that much more juice than a regular switch.