On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Chris Bagnall wrote: > On 1/7/12 4:47 pm, Eugen Leitl wrote: >> Are there any JunOS features you consider killer that >> are not in pfSense 2.1? What would be these features? > > 'JunOS' is a fairly vague comparison point - the JunOS feature set > supported by the big Juniper routers is somewhat different from that > supported by the little SOHO firewalls.
These would be ScreenOS, and aren't these EOLed? > As a routing platform - the big difference (in my experience) has been > in BGP. Whilst pfSense does have an OpenBGP package, I've not heard too > many people using it in anger with full routing tables for considerable > traffic volumes (i.e. >1Gbps). By contrast, that's fairly standard for > all but the very bottom J-series boxes (and even the very bottom J2320 > will do 400Mbps). > > Actually, BGP on pfSense is an area I'd really like to learn more about > from people using it in anger - I can think of quite a few sites with > ageing J-series and Quagga boxes that I'd love to replace with pfSense > at some point - if pfSense proves appropriate. I would be also quite interested in hearing more about such power uses of pfSense. > As a firewall I can't really comment - I've no real experience with the > smaller Juniper SOHO boxes. I've picked up a free Netscreen 5GT (which is ScreenOS) a few days ago and it's pretty rudimentary. I think the cheapest JunOS devices are SRX100 and higher. Apparently the first useful product line is SRX210. The hardware doesn't seem half bad for the base license price, though probably still doesn't have an ASIC. _______________________________________________ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
