Jim,
I would be very interested in your view points. I am not a PIX zealot or
anything, this was just the best article I have. Perhaps you could respond
in detail with a different viewpoint.
Regards,
David Wolsefer
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Jim Brown
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:34 AM
To: 'Mark'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PIX vs CheckPoint
I've been watching this thread and I have kept quiet. The article listed
below is obviously biased. CheckPoint has its issues but none of them are
performance related. The only bad things I have to say about the product is
in relation to support, which doesn't exist, and licensing.
CheckPoint is #1 in spite of themselves. CheckPoint can handle up to ~80Mb
of throughput, if you need more then maybe you should look at some other
solution, otherwise they are all on the same field in regards to speed. They
typical shop doesn't need more than 80Mb of throughput.
The NT GUI is free, you must purchase the Motif GUI.
Nobody, and I mean Nobody, beats their GUI interface. It is the same no
matter what platform you are running on.
The Nokia/CheckPoint appliance is the best of both worlds. It is a
prehardened, highly tested OS on super performance hardware. You just drop
and insert that baby and you are ready to go. We use NT and Nokia's IPSO,
and if I could do it all over again we would only use Nokias.
Their stock is strong despite the recent gut punch the technology sector has
encountered. They have a great product with terrible customer service. This
may come back to haunt them, but in the mean time they are the best in my
opinion.
I could argue/discuss each point in the link below, but I won't bore anyone.
If someone would like more details or a realistic view on CheckPoint
capabilities you can contact me offline.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PIX vs CheckPoint
Not a bad article in here but just a little more. I have both the
Checkpoint 4.1 and the Pix 525. I bought the 525's because I was tiered of
dealing with Checkpoint. CKP is terrible at customer support and licensing,
and I am not saying this from just my experience. I was in the classes
recently and all the folks there expressed the same issues. Support is
expensive and not so bad with Pix. Remember that with CKP you rely on the
box and OS you run and that has been a performance problem for us. In
addition you had better know how to harden the box with CKP. I guess my
opinion is that a hardware device is almost always a better solution. Dollar
for Dollar the PIx is the better solution.
Good Luck
ML
"Imran Obaidullah M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
F149A24C5121D211A9710004AC4419C801B4BAF5@RSINTS002">news:F149A24C5121D211A9710004AC4419C801B4BAF5@RSINTS002...
> Hi friends,
>
> I have few basic questions,
>
> 1. If I can implement NAT and Access policy on normal router which has 2
> ethernet interfaces then how PIX improves the perfomance as an dedicated
> Firewall(If Iam not implemeting VPN).
>
> 2 Which is the best firewall and more reliable. What are the perfomance
> difference between the PIX and CheckPoint.
>
> Please send me the details
>
> Thanks
>
> imran
>
> _________________________________
> 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]
