I've got a customer with 600 employees using a 506 with no problems. The
biggest limitation is that it only has two ports, so you're not going to add
a DMZ off it, and IPSEC is only getting something like a 4 or 5mb throughput
(10mbit ports on it). Of course, this customer only has a T1, so the
1.5mbit connection is the limit, not the PIX. We're actually doing VPN
IPSEC tunnels to a number of "test sites" (my house, my office, my boss'
house) and have 7960 IP Phones working remotely. Works great so far.
--
Jason Roysdon, CCNP+Security/CCDP, MCSE, CNA, Network+, A+
List email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://jason.artoo.net/
""Chuck Larrieu"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Interesting read. Thanks.
>
> Goes to show - Cisco excels in service and support. I used to think the
> licensing procedure for Ciscoworks and Baseliner was a pain. Wow, what a
> breeze compared to Checkpoint!
>
> Another interesting comment - the PIX 506 licensing. Cisco has taken to
> being very opaque about what a PIX 506 can and should do. Last time I
> checked, Cisco's party line was that the 506 is good for "up to 10
internet
> connections" and the folks at the pre-sales help line I spoke to were
unable
> to clarify this statement. Interesting, since I had recalled from
> documentation that has long since been deleted from CCO, that the 506 was
> good for several thousand simultaneous TCP connections, which is plenty
for
> any business of a couple hundred users. I suspect Cisco kinda shot
> themselves in the foot with the 506, in that it is undercutting sales of
> 515's to small enterprises.
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Dave
> Chappell
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 3:14 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Cisco PIX vs Checkpoint FIrewall-1 [7:2878]
>
> This might be of interest:
>
> http://www.roble.com/docs/fw1_or_pix.html
>
> Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:52 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Cisco PIX vs Checkpoint FIrewall-1 [7:2878]
>
>
> In a serious enterprise of scale, I would indeed consider using both a pix
> and a server based firewall.
>
> Bri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Brown"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 7:44 AM
> Subject: RE: Cisco PIX vs Checkpoint FIrewall-1 [7:2878]
>
>
> > Security holes in lower layers? Where did you come up with that, your
> Cisco
> > rep?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eugene Nine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 5:01 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Cisco PIX vs Checkpoint FIrewall-1 [7:2878]
> >
> >
> > PIX goes up to layer 4, so it won't do things like URL filtering.
> > Checkpoint (or other SW) can do higher layer protection but may not be
as
> > well at the lower layers (due to security holes in the OS, etc)
> > Eugene
> >
> > ""Chuck Larrieu"" wrote in message
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Asked sincerely, what advantages do you see in provisions PIX plus
> > > checkpoint?
> > >
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
Of
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 2:47 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Cisco PIX vs Checkpoint FIrewall-1 [7:2878]
> > >
> > > It depends on your security policy , design and needs , generally
what
> we
> > > advice our
> > > customers is checkpoint + pix together
> > >
> > > Hatim badr a icrit :
> > >
> > > > Hi ,
> > > >
> > > > I would like to know the pluses and minuses of each product .
> Currently
> > > We
> > > > are using checkpoint and I want to convince my management to switch
to
> > > cisco
> > > > PIX firewall .
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > Hatim
> > > >
> > > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > > Get free email and a permanent address at
> http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
> > > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=3345&t=2878
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
