I would recommend to you as I am sure others will that you do not install
anything on a Realsecure box other than the Realsecure engine. Realsecure is
both CPU and memory intensive, and adding to that overhead is not a wise
idea. There are many other issues such as seperation for security reasons,
and reliability reasons
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 9:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [FW1] FW-1 and Real Secure Logging
We are running FW-1 SP2 on NT4. We are also running Real Secure 3.2 on a
separate NT box. The powers that be want to move the FW-1 logging module
off the firewall itself to a different machine, unfortunately to the same
machine as Real Secure.
Is it advisable to put Real Secure and the Checkpoint logging tool on the
same box? If not is there a spec or benchmark for what kind of box Real
Secure should be hosted on?
Checkpoint logs typically has 250,000 lines of logs per day.
Thanks.
Brian Peters
============================================================================
====
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at
http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
============================================================================
====
================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at
http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
================================================================================
