________________________________ Van: Yaroslav Doroshenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Verzonden: vr 4/4/2008 8:37 Aan: Nauwelaerts, Nick (TCM) CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] Onderwerp: Re: [c-nsp] OT: Check Point v Cisco PIX (ASA 5500 Series)
I believe dropping is also preferable if you need more performance and bandwidth capacity although I'm not sure sending RST cost CPU time on ASA platform. Correct, each packet you schedule takes up a certain amount of bandwidth & cpu resources, though it'll be comparably small. Still that bandwidth & cpu power will most likely be cheaper than the additional troubleshooting complexity you get by dropping. But as the introductary poster already stated, everyone has their own idea about this subject. I'm with the reject crew, that's the way tcp is meant to work. // nick _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
