Bradford has added many features in the last year or two. They used to be far behind. But now they are easily pulling ahead of CCA. Bradford has great deals for CCA license trade-ins if anyone is looking.I used to be a die hard Cisco fan. Do I still prefer Cisco equipment over many vendors....Sure! In today's age propriatary just doesn't work and Cisco is going to have to kick it up a notch.
Sincerely, Sidney Eaton, CCNA, Network+, NCSS, NCDE, CCSE Network Technician Ferris State University 205 West Building Big Rapids, Mi 49307 (231) 591-5388 For Support Call (231) 591-4822 or www.ferris.edu/tac Ryan Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators <[email protected]> 07/14/2008 09:12 AM Please respond to Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators <[email protected]> To [email protected] cc Subject Re: Need to upgrade Server hardware.... Folks, For those of you on L3 OOB with Cisco NAC, be aware that Bradford might not have all the features you currently enjoy. Specifically, as of a couple of years ago, Bradford did not support the SNMP assignment of VLANs by a single name for each role (instead of a VLAN ID) - a BIG problem for us. In addition watch out for double authentication hits during VPN AAA - I'm not sure if Bradford can do the bounce pass with the radius auth. Yes, I know it's 2008 and NAC should be built into any VPN appliance anyway - but it might not be able to centralize with other policy and sign on. Watch out for double auth hits on dot1x for wireless as well. I realize my web talk for Cisco might dilute my credibility on the 'which vendor' subject, but I do feel we put in due diligence on the Bradford/Cisco choice. If anyone has questions about this, please contact me off-list. - Ryan --------------------- Ryan Moore Manager of Networking | Rice University | Office: 713-348-5462 On Jul 11, 2008, at 6:00 PM, Sidney Eaton wrote: I agree. We are going to look at moving away from Clean Access because of no third party OOB support. But until now we couldn't justify the cost (and the fact that the software could easily be loaded on new hardware in case of failure), now with forcing us to buy appliances the third party vendors price tag just became $20,000-$30,000 cheaper. An extra $20,000 and we will be able to facilitate a years worth of maint, more licenses than we had with CCA, OOB, and integration with our packetshaper as well as our firewall and IPS. Not to mention we can't get Cisco to add SMP support for servers and non-super cam. I have a quad processor cam and dual processor servers with cpus idle meanwhile other cpus are sometimes hitting max load under file transfers and they are 3+Ghz CPUs. I am beginning to confuse the Cisco name with Apple. Both have good ideas.......But execution is poor. Bradford here I come, good bye Cisco. Sincerely, Sidney Eaton, CCNA, Network+, NCSS, NCDE, CCSE Network Technician Ferris State University 205 West Building Big Rapids, Mi 49307 (231) 591-5388 For Support Call (231) 591-4822 or www.ferris.edu/tac "Stanclift, Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators < [email protected]> 07/07/2008 04:21 PM Please respond to Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators < [email protected]> To [email protected] cc Subject Re: Need to upgrade Server hardware....
