|
Home > Archive > i-NET+ > April 2001 > Proxy, firewalls, gateways, routers
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Proxy, firewalls, gateways, routers
|
|
|
| I wonder if there are any *experts* who can clarify a bit of confusion for me.
1)Is there such a thing as firewall servers? Or are firewalls only 'applications' installed on existing servers, such as proxy, web servers, etc.?
2)Could anyone explain why a company would use 'internet-in-a-box' versus web/proxy servers with firewalls, or caching servers? What I'm trying to understand is, in which situations would one be more commendable over the other? And what are the drawbacks or benefits of either?
I am aware of the many features and capabilities of Iboxes (DHCP, caching, firewall, ftp, etc).
3) What is the difference between a gateway and a router? I read these terms inter-exchanged quite a lot as applying to 'networks' referring specifically to INTRANETS. To me, they perform essentially two very different functions.
If I sound like a dummy, forgive me | |
| SasiSan 2001-04-14, 4:54 pm |
| Let me help a little. Some of the strong network+ guys like Randy can probably fill in the blanks...
1) The firewalls I have installed are machines on their own without an existing Operating System. One older system called sidewinder was an application that ran on a normal machine but it was the only app running on the machine. This way it is easier to close any doorways that hackers can break through. Currently however I recommend Cisco PIX firewalls to clients. I found a white paper on Cisco's site that you can look at:
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc...tech/nat_wp.htm
Without doing any research, I think they are the leaders in the market. You will notice this is just a "black box" that only runs the firewall. It also acts as a proxy server -- but you can read that in the white paper.
2) This question intrigued me as well. My impression has always been that the internet box is for small to medium size companies that don't have the staff to maintain, or the resources to purchase a full blown solution. I do not think they can manage a T1 line or ATM/Frame Relay. I did find an article about a couple of boxes that Compaq now owns and they only seemed to confirm my original opinion -- small loads. You can check out the article at:
http://www.computernewsdaily.com/25...2207_18340.html
3) Gateway vs Router -- Easy -- Gateway translates protocols, router doesn't. Router forwards packets of data between separate networks. Okay, maybe it is not that straightforward but if you clear away all the similarities that is the key difference. I think alot of the confusion comes in the term gateway -- which is often used simply to refer to a "connection point or node" on the network. They are not referring to a gateway device but to a point. www.whatis.com even defines Routers with gateway mentioned:
"On the Internet, a router is a device or, in some cases, software in a computer, that determines the next network point to which a packet should be forwarded toward its destination. The router is connected to at least two networks and decides which way to send each information packet based on its current understanding of the state of the networks it is connected to. A router is located at any gateway (where one network meets another), including each Internet point-of-presence. A router is often included as part of a network switch. "
Notice the term gateway -- and they are not talking about the device that translates protocols. When I think of "gateways" I think of the Windows Gateway that I install to convert the Appletalk protocol to IP so my MAC users can access files and printers. Or the Novell Gateway I install to allow my Windows users talk to IPX/SPX networks. They translate protocols...
Hope this helps, and the questions were good!!! Made me think... I hope someone else can clear up anything I missed... | |
|
|
|
|
|
