We have installed SSG 140 for a customer.
I'm also playing with the cisco ASA.
I haven't put neither of them under significant performance test,
however from management point of view, juniper is much easier to
operate and makes much more sense.
If you intend to have complex security configurati
> Leigh,
> can you comment on the IPv6 support on the SSG140 ? If I
> understand correctly, ScreenOS currently only supports
> v6 on certain models?
Reading the 6.0.0r1 release notes, section 1.32 seems to
suggest that IPv6 is only available on the 5000-M2 and SSG
5/20 on Ethernet interfaces;
On 5 Jun 2007, at 17:30, Leigh Porter wrote:
> I have some 140s here and they work well. The older boxes (NS50) have
> been in production for about two years now and have never had any
> issues
> whatsoever.
Leigh,
can you comment on the IPv6 support on the SSG140 ? If I understand
correctly,
Leigh Porter wrote:
> I have some 140s here and they work well. The older boxes (NS50) have
> been in production for about two years now and have never had any issues
> whatsoever.
>
> --
> Leigh
Are you using the IPS functionality of the box?
--Mike
_
I have some 140s here and they work well. The older boxes (NS50) have
been in production for about two years now and have never had any issues
whatsoever.
--
Leigh
Peter E. Fry wrote:
>> Looking for comments from anyone using the Juniper SSG
>> line of security appliances, specifically model
> Looking for comments from anyone using the Juniper SSG
> line of security appliances, specifically model 140 or
> 520. We are considering trying one out as a replacement
> for an aging Cisco PIX 520. Most interested in the
> robustness, IPS functionality, etc. Also note that the
> new 520M
Looking for comments from anyone using the Juniper SSG line of security
appliances, specifically model 140 or 520. We are considering trying one out
as
a replacement for an aging Cisco PIX 520. Most interested in the robustness,
IPS functionality, etc. Also note that the new 520M can run JUN
7 matches
Mail list logo
