Re: Squid vs. Netscape Proxy

From: Marc van Selm <>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 08:33:56 +0200

At 04:34 PM 4/20/98 -0400, Jordyn A. Buchanan wrote:
>At 4:26 PM -0400 4/20/98, Michael Pelletier wrote:
>>I think that the first question to ask would be whether the requirement
>>for three servers and load-balancing is simply to compensate for the
>>inadequacies of the Windows NT operating system platform -- or whether a
>>single hefty server running a UNIX-derived operating system could handle
>>the entire workload of three Windows NT systems.
>A single hefty UNIX system won't provide the redundancy of multiple NT
>systems even if it provides similar performance. Of course, the logical
>thing to do is to get multiple UNIX servers as opposed to a bunch of NT
>servers, but I'm not really sure that NT was specified at a previous point
>in this thread.

No that's not the issue here (although is an up-time of > 1 year a promoter
for Unix?)

Colleague proxy-maintainers, running Netscape-unix, give me good stories.
What we shouldn't forget though that if you use free server software you
save money to invest in extremely reliable hardware (if reliability is the

Marc van Selm
NATO C3 Agency
Communication Systems Division, A-Branch
Received on Mon Apr 20 1998 - 23:27:42 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:39:47 MST