Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS or ES for server?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS or ES for server?

[Eve Atley]

We are a small company (less then 20 people) that is currently running
Redhat Linux 9 as a fileserver. We have a firewall router set up currently
that is wreaking havoc, and we had previously had used the Linux box as a
firewall and router hooked up to our shared T1 line. We're looking to return
to that system again. With cost as a factor, can we get away with Redhat
Linux WS for this purpose?

Additionally, we had abandoned the Linux system as a firewall/router for 2
reasons: to be less machine dependent, and because our ethernet cards kept
insisting on switching upon reboots (thereby causing all sorts of problems).
If we upgrade to ANY version of Redhat Enterprise, would this solve our
issues at all, or are we totally barking up the wrong tree? The system
should probably be upgraded anyway as the GUI is as slow as molasses.


Thanks so much,
Eve

Re: Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS or ES for server?

[Hal Wigoda]

get the white box version of linux.

it is basically red hat advanced server without the red hat trade marks.


On Dec 22, 2004, at 2:50 PM, Eve Atley wrote:

>
> We are a small company (less then 20 people) that is currently running
> Redhat Linux 9 as a fileserver. We have a firewall router set up 
> currently
> that is wreaking havoc, and we had previously had used the Linux box 
> as a
> firewall and router hooked up to our shared T1 line. We're looking to 
> return
> to that system again. With cost as a factor, can we get away with 
> Redhat
> Linux WS for this purpose?
>
> Additionally, we had abandoned the Linux system as a firewall/router 
> for 2
> reasons: to be less machine dependent, and because our ethernet cards 
> kept
> insisting on switching upon reboots (thereby causing all sorts of 
> problems).
> If we upgrade to ANY version of Redhat Enterprise, would this solve our
> issues at all, or are we totally barking up the wrong tree? The system
> should probably be upgraded anyway as the GUI is as slow as molasses.
>
>
> Thanks so much,
> Eve
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" 
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

Re: Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS or ES for server?

[Jens Knoell]

Hi Eve,

Eve Atley wrote:

>We are a small company (less then 20 people) that is currently running
>Redhat Linux 9 as a fileserver. We have a firewall router set up currently
>that is wreaking havoc, and we had previously had used the Linux box as a
>firewall and router hooked up to our shared T1 line. We're looking to return
>to that system again. With cost as a factor, can we get away with Redhat
>Linux WS for this purpose?
>  
>
Generally you can use whatever linux flavor you feel like, and install 
whatever software you're missing. With that in mind, yes, WS would work 
just as well as any other flavor.

>Additionally, we had abandoned the Linux system as a firewall/router for 2
>reasons: to be less machine dependent, and because our ethernet cards kept
>insisting on switching upon reboots (thereby causing all sorts of problems).
>If we upgrade to ANY version of Redhat Enterprise, would this solve our
>issues at all, or are we totally barking up the wrong tree? The system
>should probably be upgraded anyway as the GUI is as slow as molasses.
>  
>
Switching network cards (interfaces i presume) shouldn't occur either 
way. Last but not least - don't run a GUI on a firewall/router machine, 
it's a total waste of ressources :)

J

Re: Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS or ES for server?

[Scott Taylor]

Eve Atley said:
>
> We are a small company (less then 20 people) that is currently running
> Redhat Linux 9 as a fileserver. We have a firewall router set up currently
> that is wreaking havoc, and we had previously had used the Linux box as a
> firewall and router hooked up to our shared T1 line. We're looking to
> return to that system again. With cost as a factor, can we get away with
> Redhat Linux WS for this purpose?

You could, but I wouldn't put my fileserver on the Internet.

> Additionally, we had abandoned the Linux system as a firewall/router for 2
> reasons: to be less machine dependent, and because our ethernet cards kept
> insisting on switching upon reboots (thereby causing all sorts of
> problems).

Machines are so much more fun though, and much more useful than those
other things, whatever they may be.

Ethernets cards should not be changing their config, something wrong with
that setup.

> If we upgrade to ANY version of Redhat Enterprise, would this solve our
> issues at all, or are we totally barking up the wrong tree? The system
> should probably be upgraded anyway as the GUI is as slow as molasses.

Probably not, any Linux could be improperly configured if you don't know
what you are doing.  THen again ES3 with phone support might be useful,
but expensive.  I would go with something like debian and no GUI is needed
for a firewall/router, but IPTABLES is you friend there.

Good luck.

--
Scott

Re: Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS or ES for server?

[chuck gelm]

Eve Atley wrote:
> We are a small company (less then 20 people) that is currently running
> Redhat Linux 9 as a fileserver. We have a firewall router set up currently
> that is wreaking havoc, and we had previously had used the Linux box as a
> firewall and router hooked up to our shared T1 line. We're looking to return
> to that system again. With cost as a factor, can we get away with Redhat
> Linux WS for this purpose?
> 
> Additionally, we had abandoned the Linux system as a firewall/router for 2
> reasons: to be less machine dependent, and because our ethernet cards kept
> insisting on switching upon reboots (thereby causing all sorts of problems).
> If we upgrade to ANY version of Redhat Enterprise, would this solve our
> issues at all, or are we totally barking up the wrong tree? The system
> should probably be upgraded anyway as the GUI is as slow as molasses.
> 
> 
> Thanks so much,
> Eve

  Hi, Eve:

  I see that there are several reponses already, but I thought I'd add my
2 cents... It seems to me that there was some unclear statements and
some assumptions or myths expressed.  You didn't explain
'wreaking havoc', but then again, you didn't request help with that
topic.

   Probably, any 'enterprise' distribution would suffice, so yes,
Redhat Linux WS would probably suffice.

  I would like to understand more about:
"ethernet cards kept insisting on switching upon reboots",
before responding about whether:
"ANY version of Redhat Enterprise would...solve our issues".
Please explain, more fully, your 'issues'.

  I do not understand your reference to 'the GUI' on a file server
(or router) unless it is also being used as a workstation.  One
might use a GUI application to configure a
'firewall/router/file-server', but a GUI is not needed for those
services to run.

  I am using an 80486dx33 system as a firewall/router with my home
cable-modem network.  I get just under 3 Megabit downloads, so anthing
equal or better should be enough for your shared 1 Megabit T1 service.
You didn't mention any hardware issues, so this information may not be
relevant to your situation.

  I am using Slackware v9.1, default kernel 2.4.22,
default IPTABLES v1.2.8, and an IPTABLES script slightly modified
from one I found posted on the internet.
http://newbiedoc.sourceforge.net/networking/homegateway.html#IPMASQSETTINGSETH
See the part 9.2.2 For iptables Users.  Your particular situation would
probably be satisfied by the appropriate configuration of IPTABLES.

In short, I think your solution is applications, tools, and
configuration
  dependant
and not distribution dependant.

HTH, Chuck