Hugo van der Kooij a écrit :
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, pkc_mls wrote:
has anyone ever managed to get a more recent version of cpinfo ?
Yes. But I suggest you use your Check Point contacts to get it. I will
considere request for that versions as SPAM. If you need a working
infoview then you need
Hi all,
Our current firewall appliances suffer from performance issues when some of
the application layer checks in smartdefense (especially http and dns
checks) are switched on. So, we are planning to buy new appliances. I wonder
if you could share your opinions about the pros and cons of
o s wrote:
Hi all,
Our current firewall appliances suffer from performance issues when some of
the application layer checks in smartdefense (especially http and dns
checks) are switched on. So, we are planning to buy new appliances. I
wonder
if you could share your opinions about the pros
I think you're better of with a DL380 G4/5 and RHEL 3 on it and as
much
RAM as you need than Nokia or any other appliance that can run CP.
I'll take that one step beyond and offer: why pay for RHEL when you can
use SecurePlatform for free? I agree that the DL380 is an excellent
platform and you
hi,
save your money and time use a scalable and stable system like DL380 whit
SPLAT !
cheers
--
Paolo Riviello
Mob. +39.328.1749468
Home: http://www.paoloriviello.com
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Skype: pao_rivi Icq: 285354822
If men could get pregnant, abortion
Cassell, Damon Z. wrote:
I think you're better of with a DL380 G4/5 and RHEL 3 on it and as
much
RAM as you need than Nokia or any other appliance that can run CP.
I'll take that one step beyond and offer: why pay for RHEL when you can
use SecurePlatform for free?
because splat is a
Advantages of running SPLAT on DL380 or Dell Poweredge 1800s:
1) You can put a shit load of memory on it. I think the Dell PowerEdge is
capable of having
up to 12GB on it
2) Intel hardware is very cost effective (aka cheap and widely available),
3) RAID redundancies
Advantages
My userdefined alerts just stopped working completely. I get the alert in the
log that says the rule was processed but no userdefined?
Windows Management Server/R61.. I'm running ActivePerl with a bat file
generated by ActivePerl to fix the STDIN issues.
Roger Herr
because splat is a little to barebone for my taste and quite old
binaries on it.
also CP works like a charm on Centos 3 and you get the benefit of a
full
blown up to date distro for free and the security of a Check Point
fw.
SPLAT might be too stripped down for your taste, but it is still an
Hi All,
I have single Nokia Enforcement module running simplified extended VRRP on
IPSO 4.1
build 19. I am planning to add another Nokia Enforcement module later as
Active/Standby
configuration.
When I configure simplified VRRP on the nokia, let say the IP address of the
When we were setting up our first Nokia's we tried the simplified mod eand
ran into a lot of problems, we went with the legacy mode and we have not had
any problems with it. it works the way you expect it to, it is a pain if you
are working with a lot of interfaces. We have some that we are doing
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Cassell, Damon Z. wrote:
because splat is a little to barebone for my taste and quite old
binaries on it.
also CP works like a charm on Centos 3 and you get the benefit of a
full
blown up to date distro for free and the security of a Check Point
fw.
SPLAT might be too
This is a known and documented bug. As you mentioned the delete the
vrrp definition and recreate it from scratch method works to resolve it.
Brian Lawrence
Senior Security Engineer
-Original Message-
From: Mailing list for discussion of Firewall-1
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Another issue is the amount of RAM. On an enforcement unit I see
little
use for anything over 2 GB RAM. I mean it will make a nice cache on
your
disk but most people will run out bandwith before they run out of
memory.
Several of my SPLAT systems have 4 GB of RAM, but I never see more than
Hi Brian,
Do you happen to know what the Nokia or Checkpoint SK # for this bug?
I need to be able to document this. thanks.
cisco4ng
Brian Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a known and documented bug.
As you mentioned the delete the
vrrp definition and recreate it from scratch method
Her is the info I like to share with all of you guys,
you might need them if your firewalls are in US.
-DST-
Questions regarding to DST for R55 and R60.
Symptoms
Date and time are not updated for March 11th 2007.
Cause
SecurePlatform fix for North
Many thanks to Gary and everyone for the advice. I will stick with legacy vrrp
then.
cisco4ng
Gary Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nokia's site is having issues, but then maybe it is me. This is detailed
in the release notes and/or the main download page for the IPSO, not
sure which
I am running NGx R61 with HFA_01 on Nokia IP560 with IPSO 4.1 build 19, with
legacy
vrrp configuration. The Nokia is being managed by Provider-1 NGx R61 with
HFA_01.
I have a simple network 192.168.1.0/24 behind this firewall. This network is
being hide
NAT to the firewall External
18 matches
Mail list logo
