Have a look at this page:
http://www.privoxy.org/man-page/privoxy-man-page.html
I think you might want to use them both.
I've used squid (only) for years and LOVE it!.
ed
p.s. rant: I wish the yum repositories would properly set their expires headers. that way the files are stored for the proper amount of time in the proxy cache.
have a look at my fedora.us repository mirror:
http://www.edebris.com/fedora.us/mirror/
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Chalonec Roger wrote:
Well I was not sure if these two nomenclature names were actually proxy servers. Are there relative advantages and disadvantages between the two other than anti-virus?
Thanks Alexander
-----Original Message----- From: fedora-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:fedora-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alexander Dalloz Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 11:13 AM To: For users of Fedora Core releases Subject: Re: FC1 Proxy Servers
Am Di, den 08.06.2004 schrieb Chalonec Roger um 17:05:
I am looking to implement proxy services on FC1 and I have noted that there may be two. One called Privoxy and another called Squid. Does anyone have experience with these or a better proxy server that run on
FC1? I am currently using Microsoft ISA as a proxy server on Intel.
Roger
Your question is a bit unspecific. Both proxies are working great, while squid is certainly is known by more people than privoxy. I think privoxy has a better antiv-virus integration capability, if that counts.
Alexander
-- Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG key 1024D/ED695653 1999-07-13 Fedora GNU/Linux Core 2 (Tettnang) on Athlon CPU kernel 2.6.5-1.358 Serendipity 17:11:09 up 6 days, 17:29, load average: 0.43, 0.60, 0.45
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Security on the internet is impossible without strong, open, and unhindered encryption.
