Having dealt with the SRX through some very trying times (from early alpha boxes running on SSG) to current 11.x code I have to say the SRX has come a long long way. The 9.x code train and even well into 10.x saw some pretty big bugs with HA, VPN and other critical features.
I have you say 10.4 and the 11.x code train have been pretty stable in whatever environment I've thrown them in. I tend to use the SRX's for their core functions (e.g. NAT, security policies, VPN's, etc) and stay away from IDP/UTM but from what i've seen they've been in good shape. I would encourage you to check out the 240. It's an amazing firewall for the price. Stick to 10.4 or something in the 11.x code and you'll be fine. I think you'll be shocked how stable and bug free it is after hearing all the bad items on this list. Good luck, hope this helps. -Tim Eberhard On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:28 PM, TCIS List Acct <[email protected]> wrote: > Over the past few years the general feeling I've gotten reading j-nsp and > elsewhere was to stay away from the SRX line until the code matured. We've > got an upcoming project that I'm considering using a SRX 240 for. > > Has the code matured to the point that it can be considered a stable > platform for security (just basic firewall, 1:1 NATs, maybe a few VPNs), > high availability, and some very basic layer 3 routing services? > > TIA. > > --Mike > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
