> Okay, we have a new boss how loves Cisco and he thinks it is the answer > to all. So, he has already ruled that all Site-to-Site VPNs are to be > replace with Cisco gear. Now he is asking about the client side of > Checkpoint. So, I need some strong facts as to why Checkpoint has a > better VPN setup for the client side than Cisco. Unfortunately I am not > up on Cisco products to much, but I hear that you can use Microsoft's > IPSEC client to connect to a Cisco VPN device instead of using the Cisco > client. I think this is the main reason he wants to use Cisco. Can you > use Windows 2K to connect to Checkpoint or do I have to use the > Checkpoint Client? The Win2k client can be used, but I believe it needs to be set up as a site to site VPN with a static IP and can not be used to replace SR.
Also, SR has become a lot more flexible and a lot more powerful recently. Deploying SR with the packaging tool is now almost a trivial task. CheckPoint can authenticate against RADIUS as well as ACE, LDAP, and a variety of other servers making it more flexible. Cisco only permits RADIUS and TACACS+ I believe. While I like the Cisco product line, I think they still have a lot of room for improvement. -Don ================================================= To set vacation, Out Of Office, or away messages, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the BODY of the email add: set fw-1-mailinglist nomail ================================================= To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html ================================================= If you have any questions on how to change your subscription options, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] =================================================
