This is what you want:
http://www.roble.com/docs/fw1_or_pix.html
Regards,
David Wolsefer, CCIE #5858
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Imran Obaidullah M
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 4:23 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: PIX vs Chec
Not a bad article in here but just a little more. I have both the
Checkpoint 4.1 and the Pix 525. I bought the 525's because I was tiered of
dealing with Checkpoint. CKP is terrible at customer support and licensing,
and I am not saying this from just my experience. I was in the classes
recent
From: Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PIX vs CheckPoint
Not a bad article in here but just a little more. I have both the
Checkpoint 4.1 and the Pix 525. I bought the 525's because I was tiered of
dealing with Checkpoint
Where I work we have two PIX Firewalls (520), one strictly for Internet
usage (e-commerce), the other for corporate Internet access + Extranets.
When I went to PIX training, everyone there had already worked with
Checkpoint Firewalls, and so I heard some good feedback in regards to
comparisons.
M
]]On Behalf Of
Jim Brown
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:34 AM
To: 'Mark'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PIX vs CheckPoint
I've been watching this thread and I have kept quiet. The article listed
below is obviously biased. CheckPoint has its issues but none of them are
performan
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 1:34 PM
To: 'Mark'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PIX vs CheckPoint
I've been watching this thread and I have kept quiet. The article listed
below is obviously biased. CheckPoint has its issues but none of them are
performance relate
but I won't bore
anyone.
> If someone would like more details or a realistic view on CheckPoint
> capabilities you can contact me offline.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:54 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subje
x27;t get me wrong, I love Cisco but this product just fit our needs.
-Original Message-
From: Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 1:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PIX vs CheckPoint
In some aspects I do agree but we have checkpoint on sun 250'
Hi David,
Thanks for the link. The URL answers my 2nd question. Can you give me some
details on the first qstn.
regards
imran
-Original Message-
From: David Wolsefer
To: Imran Obaidullah M
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 1/12/01 11:04 PM
Subject: RE: PIX vs CheckPoint
This is what you
Hi,
Thanks for the link. It answers my 2nd question. Can you give some details
on the 1st.
Regards
imran
-Original Message-
From: David Wolsefer
To: Imran Obaidullah M
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 1/12/01 11:04 PM
Subject: RE: PIX vs CheckPoint
This is what you want:
http
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Imran Obaidullah M
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 9:24 PM
To: 'David Wolsefer '; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED] '
Subject: RE: PIX vs CheckPoint
Hi,
Thanks for the li
I have setup and managed both PIX and Checkpoint in a
variety of environments. I think they are both solid
options in different situations. Here is how I market
these products.
PIX
- more cost effective
- fast
- you can have fail over
- Can be more complicated to setup the CLI, but PIX
has a ni
Dear x,
I love your presentation. You spoke well.
Nurudeen
""x"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have setup and managed both PIX and Checkpoint in a
> variety of environments. I think they are both solid
> options in different situations. Here is how I market
On the other hand, there's a distinct third option, which is to run
Checkpoint on a dedicated hardware appliance, for example the Nokia Ipso
line of gear. This removes one of the Checkpoint disadvantages (don't need
to know Unix or NT), but introduces another disadvantage (less flexible -
you sho
Hi
Nokia?s IPSO OS is Unix. It?s a ?hardened? and customize version of
FreeBSD. I?ve worked on Nokia/CheckPoint boxes and it does help to have
knowledge of Unix. I have not had the chance to work with PIX yet so I
can?t comment on the merits of a CheckPoint/Nokia vs. PIX. The only
negative th
With that said, I'm really a PIX person so don't get the wrong impression.
;-)
Rik
-Original Message-
From: nrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 7:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PIX VS CheckPoint [7:40136]
On the other hand, there's a d
I knew somebody was going to come back with that. All-right fine, it is
indeed true that Ipso is a hacked version of Unix. But then again, so is
Cisco IOS and Juniper JunOS, and you could say that it helps to have
knowledge of Unix to run either of those (especially JunOS).The point I
was tr
f
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PIX VS CheckPoint [7:40136]
On the other hand, there's a distinct third option, which is to run
Checkpoint on a dedicated hardware appliance, for example the Nokia Ipso
line of gear. This removes one of the Checkpoint
t: Re: PIX VS CheckPoint [7:40136]
I knew somebody was going to come back with that. All-right fine, it is
indeed true that Ipso is a hacked version of Unix. But then again, so is
Cisco IOS and Juniper JunOS, and you could say that it helps to have
knowledge of Unix to run either of those (espec
2002 9:21 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: PIX VS CheckPoint [7:40136]
>
>I knew somebody was going to come back with that. All-right fine, it is
>indeed true that Ipso is a hacked version of Unix. But then again, so is
>Cisco IOS and Juniper JunOS, and you could say t
As long as you're into comparing vendors, you might want to take a look at
Netscreen. the published data indicates it is every bit as fast, if not
faster, than PIX and has a GUI interface every bit as convenient as
Checkpoint.
It is also a whole lot less expensive than either.
""Jeffrey Reed""
PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Timo Graser
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 7:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PIX VS CheckPoint [7:40136]
The Pix has also a browser interface. The only disadvantage in the past
was, that you could not configure a vpn. With the new pdm you will be
able to do this too
, 2002 2:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PIX VS CheckPoint [7:40136]
Timo- Which version of the PDM are you referring to that has the VPN config
capability??
I have 1.1.2 now, and I have not found that functionality... Am I just
overlooking something!?!?!
TIA for your response.
-Mark Odette
23 matches
Mail list logo
