Also, when comparing the two boxes, please keep in mind your environment and
what you are looking for the firewall to do. My experience with the PIX box
is that it is primarily an address translation box and it fits these types
of environments very well. If you are not going to be doing address
translation, then the Checkpoint box is definitely a better box. You also
need to look at the configuration interface on each. Both Checkpoint and
the PIX have a text base configuration tool. Configuring the PIX is just
like configuring a Cisco router I really don't know anything to compare the
Checkpoint text interface to (I've never used it). The Graphical Interface
for the Checkpoint box is a very easy to use configuration tool where the
PIX graphical interface appears cumbersome (I've never used it). Finally,
checkpoint gives you a tool that you can view the firewall logs easily, the
PIX box you need to send the logs to a syslog server.
Having reviewed both boxes, I can see a good fit for both in the correct
environment. What you really need to do is know your environment and what
features you need. Then with this information get together with Cisco and
have them tell you how their box would fit your environment and do the same
with Checkpoint. From this, you can find which box would be the best fit.
Jim Wentzel
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Schindler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 10:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [FW1] Firewall1 vs. PIX
These articles are old. They discuss Check Point when a version for NT had
just become available and the guys that tested it didn't even know how to
set up a stealth rule.
If you are going to do a test review of products, it helps if you know how
they work before you get them.
If you want to compare the two products, please use another source.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Anning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mark Herms (SD)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:49 AM
Subject: Re: [FW1] Firewall1 vs. PIX
>
>
>
> Mark
>
> Heres a couple of links I found a while back on this subject.
>
> http://www.networkcomputing.com/921/921f2side1.html
> http://www.idg.se/sartryck/art/firewall1_eng.html
>
> Hope this helps
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> "Mark Herms (SD)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 17/07/2000 07:48:05
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc: (bcc: Mike Anning/WEY/EU/CHEP)
> Subject: [FW1] Firewall1 vs. PIX
>
>
>
>
>
> Are there any white papers or studies on Firewall1 vs. PIX. I am an avid
> Firewall1 user but my company may want to switch.
>
> Thanks for your words of wisdom...
>
> Mark Herms
> Network Engineer
> COMPS, Inc
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> ========================================================================
> ========
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions
> at
> http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
> ========================================================================
> ========
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ========================================================================
> ========
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions
> at
> http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
> ========================================================================
> ========
============================================================================
====
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at
http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
============================================================================
====
================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at
http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
================================================================================
