![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/6d198f8c8f1c94ccef873cebcf4f5dfa.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
gchris@bellsouth.net wrote:
"Paul W. Abrahams" wrote:
On Friday 27 February 2004 7:35 am, Malke Routh wrote:
Hi, Alejo. This is the part where I tell you that Windows ICS sucks and is nasty even with just Windows boxen. This is the part where I tell you to get an inexpensive (<$50usd) router instead or put the Linux box as the gateway. ICS just isn't very good, even with an all-Windows situation.
I'll second that. ICS requires a box with two ethernet cards, which in itself can be tricky to configure whether in Linux or Windows.
Routers are the key to heaven these days no matter what OS you're running.
Paul Abrahams
Paul, I originally posted the question and I'm here to tell you that XP ICS has faultlessly delivered internet access to five other Windows boxes for over a year. With Windows, adding another box is as simple as giving it the gateway address 192.168.0.1 period. If Linux desktops are going to replace Windows desktops they need to be just as easy to configure, and my goal is to find out how to do that correctly.
With Linux, adding another box is as simple as giving it the gateway address 192.168.0.1 period. Spot the difference? I have here 3 Linux boxes and two laptops permanently up, one laptop using Cisco VPN into work via LAN or dial-up, all hub connected to a Linux firewall box out to a cable modem and it was a no brainer to set up. I added one box a few weeks ago using Mandrake 10.0-beta2. I have a mix of Mandrake 9.2, SuSE 9.0 with 2.6.3-mm3 kernels and RedHat 9, plus I occasionally dig out and attach a spare box with a Knoppix CD. All are able to access the internet. On the desktop, I do FlightGear, watch TV, Gnomemeeting, hamradio VOIP, hamradio control using grig and a multitude of other stuff, also using Crossover office for Lotus Notes and IE5 for web sites that ban other browsers.
BTW, XP ICS can use two NICs or one NIC and a dialup modem or one NIC and a USB connection to a cable/DSL modem. Now tell me why I need a $50 router to fix something that isn't broken? ;) Chris
I'd advise a router as it's a specialised item with limited objectives and hence simpler and less likely to succumb to attacks than a box that is loaded down with all sorts of applications that may subject it to compromise. The router can be locked down more securely. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer Linux Only Shop.