If they are already used to a SonicWALL in their environment it might be best to stick with one of those.
The feature set is a known quantity, the VPN client will be (for IPsec) or should be (for SSL VPN) the same, etc. The SSL VPN client is Mac-compatible. -- Phil Brutsche [email protected] From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of J- P Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 10:58 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [NTSysADM] Firewall upgrade Hi all, I have a client that has a Sonicwall tz 170 or 190 and the ssl appliance 200 I believe, either way both are end of life , and no support on them, so we are looking at a replacement , here's the environment; 2 site to site tunnels (one to a draytek, other to a cisco ) small office each 5 users Dual wan required & VPN obviously, HQ; VMWARE essential host (guest 2008ts with Citrix Fundamentals) 1 OSX server , profile manager (10 macs) 1 2003r2 DC 1 2003 member with SQL 2 hyper v host running 2012 (Guest on host 1 exchange 2013. Guests on host 2008r2 DC, 2012 file server, 2012 RDS in Eval mode not sure if they want to convert from Citrix Fundamentals yet) 50 local users, most of which remote in via citrix, however, the designers need to VPN in on their MACs in order to access /edit files with OSX . Given all the capabilities /options with 2012 VPN , remote web access, direct access etc, does it make more sense to still use the firewall to handle all these tasks, or should I be looking at server 2012 to handle these connections ? Thanks for your imput
