RE: [squid-users] pros&contras websense cacheflow<->squid

> Hi,
> Does anyone no the websense cacheflow package (also has a redhat
> distribution)? I would like to know the pros and contras (not
> for myself) to
> argument using squid in stead. I like some comments on authentication,

Two words: access control.

With cacheflow it's either all or nothing, you can't limit accesses on a
per-user basis. Supports NTLM authentication, but requires an agent
on the DC.

> performance, differences, monitoring, administration.

Administration is only web-based. It might have SNMP, I'm not sure.
Cacheflow and squid only share the caching function. Cacheflow is
more resilient to HDD failures (unless you're doing RAID of course),
and should be more performing. Supports censorware out-of-the-box.

Squid is more friendly to cache hierarchies (cache digests), and has
better overall configurability all over the place. This of course adds
to the setup time.

-- 
	/kinkie