Re: Ports upgrade

From: Vince <jhary_at_unsane.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:57:02 +0100
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> "Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri" <almarrie_at_gmail.com> writes:
>> May I ask you why do you prefer portsnap over them?
> 
> It's simpler to use, and a lot faster.  It's also HTTP-based, which
> makes it firewall-friendly, even in braindead corporate environments.
> 
> DES
Plus the saving in bandwidth for a large number of machines (I know
bandwidth is cheap but still,) if you use a caching proxy. Oh and its
cryptographically signed if thats a concern :)


Vince
Received on Thu Apr 12 2007 - 07:57:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:08 UTC