Svr-03 and DMZ

What is a very good reason to put a server, such as a RRAS or any server, on
a DMZ instead of behind a firewall?
Thanks for the input.

A DMZ is behind a firewall. The real difference is what is between the
DMZ and the private LAN. If you use the back-to-back firewall model there is
an additional firewall between the DMZ and the private LAN.

The best candidates for a DMZ are servers which need to be accessed
routinely from the Internet but only occasionally or never from the LAN.
Some people like to put things like Exchange or remote access servers in a
DMZ but I don't like the idea. It means that you have to open up the inner
firewall to allow client machines acccess to the servers in the DMZ.

"BrianMultiLanguage" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:10EBFA78-700A-43F9-8C3B-(E-Mail Removed)...
> What is a very good reason to put a server, such as a RRAS or any server,
> on
> a DMZ instead of behind a firewall?
> Thanks for the input.

Bill Grant a utilisé son clavier pour écrire :
> A DMZ is behind a firewall. The real difference is what is between the DMZ
> and the private LAN. If you use the back-to-back firewall model there is an
> additional firewall between the DMZ and the private LAN.
>
> The best candidates for a DMZ are servers which need to be accessed
> routinely from the Internet but only occasionally or never from the LAN. Some
> people like to put things like Exchange or remote access servers in a DMZ but
> I don't like the idea. It means that you have to open up the inner firewall
> to allow client machines acccess to the servers in the DMZ.
>
> "BrianMultiLanguage" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> message news:10EBFA78-700A-43F9-8C3B-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> What is a very good reason to put a server, such as a RRAS or any server,
>> on
>> a DMZ instead of behind a firewall?
>> Thanks for the input.

For example, some Exchange versions can be configured as a front-end
server (to be puted in DMZ) and back-end server (To be puten in the
LAN)

So the frond-end server act as a proxy applications to secure WEB
Access

RIQUADENT

Thanks.
That's more clear now.

"Bill Grant" wrote:

> A DMZ is behind a firewall. The real difference is what is between the
> DMZ and the private LAN. If you use the back-to-back firewall model there is
> an additional firewall between the DMZ and the private LAN.
>
> The best candidates for a DMZ are servers which need to be accessed
> routinely from the Internet but only occasionally or never from the LAN.
> Some people like to put things like Exchange or remote access servers in a
> DMZ but I don't like the idea. It means that you have to open up the inner
> firewall to allow client machines acccess to the servers in the DMZ.
>
> "BrianMultiLanguage" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> message news:10EBFA78-700A-43F9-8C3B-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > What is a very good reason to put a server, such as a RRAS or any server,
> > on
> > a DMZ instead of behind a firewall?
> > Thanks for the input.
>
>