Comments are embedded.
On Mon, 26 Jul 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Completely off, my friend - you have no clue when it comes to
> "metaphorical" aspects ... from what I said one should understand
> that I do NOT promote "walking" instead of "using cars", but
> "maintaining" the "car" yourself (if one can, or is willing to do that,
> up to whatever point he/she is capable), rather than bringing it to a
> "mechanic" ... oh, well, you are one of the third parties, so ... sorry
> about that.
>
Actually, what you suggest would (for a lot of people) boil down to not
only walking, but never leaving the house again. Who determines what level
of capability the person has? The person themself? Sure, I would consider
trying my hand at tinkering with my own car, but I would take the car my
wife and children drove in to a qualified professional.
>
> Are you suggesting that C&W is one of the "charlatans"? How
> would one determine that, when all the magazines are full of
> articles about them? Only experiences like mine would enlighten
> people ... I hope.
>
Since when are magazines anything other than propaganda for one service or
product or another? C&W is far from a "Major Player". How long have they
been monitoring bastion hosts? A few years?
> You certainly are prejudiced ... leave others with the right to
> their opinion (like myself), without jumping all over the place with
> statements like "uneducated knee-jerk reaction" ... it won't
> definitely help your company (if you speak for them, which certainly
> looke like), if one thinks of people on this list as potential
> customers ... besides the fact that I am pretty sure you prove
> you're missing some "education", with statements like yours ...
This is funny. I admitted the fact that I may be, however, it is you who
provide us with broad sweeping generalizations of how No one should use
*ANY* third party monitoring services, because they (again all of them)
are a worthless hassle. Which would you call more prejudiced, and you base
your prejudice on two companies out of the many out there. Which of us is
making the more uneducated statement?
I allowed that yes, while there are some useless companies out there worth
avoiding, there are those out there that live up to the task. But,
according to you, I am 'jumping all over the place' and 'not allowing
others to their opinions'.
And, while I did call your statement uneducated (which it was), I did not
stoop to a personal attack on you yourself. Educated people can, will, and
have made uneducated reactions.
Finally, I do not speak on behalf of my company, which is an
assumption you made from my statement of what I do. But I will take this
assumption of yours into consideration (as should any other readers who
have bothered to read this) in determining how well you research before
making unprofessional judgements. Or was that considered to be a threat?
To quiet me in fear of casting bad light on my company? I see how you
operate; personal insults, and threats. Very professional.
>
> > Joel Gridley
> > Site Patrol/Firewall Specialist "Be the packet"
> > GTE Internetworking, "Powered by BBN"
> > Burlington, MA
> >
> > On Sun, 25 Jul 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > On 25 Jul 99, at 8:41, Magowan, Richard M. (ITS) wrote:
> > >
> > > > My company has grown rather quickly through merger activity and I find
> > > > myself having to upgrade my Internet service to include multiple sites. I do
> > > > not have the staff to properly manage and monitor the firewall environment
> > > > at the remote sites, hell I don't even have the time to properly watch the
> > > > one I've got! Anyway, I am evaluating SAVVIS as our possible new ISP with
> > > > the intent to have them manage the firewall environment for a year or so.
> > > > Checkpoint (Unix) will be the firewall supported. Questions:
> > > > Anybody ever used this kind of service?
> > > > Anybody ever used this service from SAVVIS? Anybody used SAVVIS for ISP. As
> > > > for FW management, with the Checkpoint console is it practical to manage the
> > > > remote devices centrally (must be since ISPs all do this - right?). How
> > > > "safe" is managed services. Some will say trust no one but I've got to be
> > > > practical with 15,000 users and 150 sites to manage and management that
> > > > seems to thinks of the firewall in terms of an appliance. Any insight is
> > > > greatly appreciated. Thank You.
> > > > -
> > > > [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> > > > "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
> > >
> > > If you can, DO NOT USE A THIRD PARTY - rather train and do
> > > it yourself. I inhereted an MCI - then Cable and Wireless firewall
> > > management service, and I DO NOT KNOW WHAT I AM PAYING
> > > THEM $5,300 / month for !!!!. At least since C&W took over from
> > > MCI - it's been a NIGHTMARE!!! - wrong bills, no response to
> > > service, no calls back from their Sales people - I am seriously
> > > looking into legal stuff against them, believe it or not!!! I ended up
> > > taking a class in Checkpoint myself, just to get a flavor of what this
> > > firewall specific implemntation does, I will probably look also into
> > > Raptor and Altavista ones, and then - shall the BEST win - will
> > > bring the whole management in-house! Using a service nowadays
> > > is HORRIBLE!!!. At least that's my own experience ...
> > > Good luck, anyway,
> > > Stefan
>
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
>
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
