On Tue, 21 May 2002 10:31:42 +0200, "Hans Ekbrand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't understand why this would be of benefit; having two seperate lines
>might buy some bandwidth, but it must be a real pain in physically wiring the place.
>Besides- I would thing the internet traffic (0>1M/sec, typical) would almost be
>unnoticed on a 100-base-T network. Am I missing something?
>
> I think you are writing about different things. Richard Camp probably
> refers to a solution where only the server is connected to "the
> internet", while you seem to write about a setup where every terminal
> has two nics, one for internet traffic and one for LTSP. The OP was
> not clear about why he wanted a "gateway", perhaps he didn't know what
> he wanted. And the answers he recieved reflected that ambiguity.
No, not the terminals- the server. Everyone's been pretty resolute about putting
the dual cards at the server...one to the terminal farm, the other to the rest of the
net. I just don't see why anyone would bother. What's the scoop?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Fahrländer Linux Zealot, Conservative, and Technomad
Evansville, IN My Voyage: http://www.CounterMoon.com
ICQ 5119262
AOL: WheelDweller
Yahoo: WheelDweller Me: http://www.kamakiriad.com/aboutme.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________________________
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
_____________________________________________________________________
Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.openprojects.net
