linux gateway and router = redundant?

[E Frank Ball]

On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 12:34:34AM -0800, ME wrote:
} On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, augie wrote:
} > that is 'web proxy'. let's say i decide to run squid on the gateway to cache 
} > webpages to speed up websurfing even more. now i wonder if i should be more 
} > concerned with memory, hard disk storage, and proccessor speed?
} 
} I have not tried squid on a low-end PC, but would expect it to be much
} like a web server of simple content for system use (not so much
} SSI/CGI/SHTML, but lots of TXT and HTML for example):
} 
} Frank has done some pretty cool things, and he may have had some
} experience with running squid closer to system limits. Since my statements
} above are educated guesses based on fragmented distant memories, if Frank
} offers something on this more recent to contradict me, he will likely have
} the more correct answer.

Thanks Mike, but I haven't run squid.  As Mike pointed out cgi is more
CPU intensive than static html web pages, which is all I do.  Most
security people will tell you not to run a web server on your firewall
machine, but when you read up on all the web server vulnerabilities they
are vitually all cgi related.  My web server is compiled without cgi
support, so I figure it is secure enough to run directly on the firewall
machine, plus the load is inconsiquential.

-- 

   E Frank Ball                frankb at efball.com