The most convincing argument could be in the NOS, not the firewall itself.
BorderManager is nice if you have a homogeneous Novell network (though NDS for NT
could be argued here).
Also, I don't know if you can find BorderManager performance stats, but there are
plenty of Firewall-1 stats out there for NT, Solaris and HP/UX (I'm talking about
throughput here, not the BorderManager caching server).
Just a couple thoughts.
James Paterson wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts or an idea where I can find some real
>world comparisons between the 2. We have just merged with a firm that uses Border
>Manager for their firewall, and Iam using Checkpoint and have for years.
>
> Iam trying to find some reasons that non-technical management will understand for
>using Checkpoint to connect the two office rather than Border Manager, as Border
>Manager is a lot cheaper. Try explaining statefull inspection to a MBA.
>
> They respective companies websites are not helpfull, as checkpoint has nothing on
>comparisons, and the Novell comparision is just plain wrong. (according to Novell,
>Checkpoint doesn't even support gopher as a service).
>
> Any leads / tips on this oranges to apples comparison would be appreciated.
>
> Regards
>
> James
>
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
