[fw-wiz] Re: Proxy and Stateful together ??
From: Bennett Todd (bet@rahul.net)
Date: 11/18/02
- Next message: Scott, Richard: "RE: [fw-wiz] segmentation of DMZs"
- Previous message: Jean Caron: "[fw-wiz] Re: Proxy and Stateful together ??"
- In reply to: Jean Caron: "[fw-wiz] Re: Proxy and Stateful together ??"
- Next in thread: Bennett Todd: "Re: [fw-wiz] Proxy and Stateful together ??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Bennett Todd <bet@rahul.net> To: Jean Caron <caronj@norac.net> Date: Mon Nov 18 13:33:19 2002
2002-11-18-13:12:23 Jean Caron:
> You're right, my original post had no mention of org size. It is, however,
> for what I qualify to be a large size organization (25,000+ users).
It does make a difference, boy howdy. Consolidating multiple
architecturally distinct components of the firewall plant onto one
box makes a lot less sense in that context. I've done firewall
plants for tiny shops served by a single T1, and by big shops whose
H-A firewall plants handle multiple T3s in each of their multiple
physical sites. Different kit, but the block diagrams look pretty
similar, just changing the dotted lines showing what sets of
functions are implemented on what boxes.
Re the open source -vs- commercial debate, may I lodge a strong
request that we fail to go around that dance yet again in this
forum? I doubt anybody on this planet will have their mind changed
at this point, we just need to wait for one family or the other of
these hatfields and mccoys to die out.
-Bennett
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Next message: Scott, Richard: "RE: [fw-wiz] segmentation of DMZs"
- Previous message: Jean Caron: "[fw-wiz] Re: Proxy and Stateful together ??"
- In reply to: Jean Caron: "[fw-wiz] Re: Proxy and Stateful together ??"
- Next in thread: Bennett Todd: "Re: [fw-wiz] Proxy and Stateful together ??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|