RE: [fw-wiz] pix vs. ios firewall feature set

From: avraham shir-el (arthur sherman) (avraham_at_jct.ac.il)
Date: 06/02/03

  • Next message: Douglas J Hunley: "Re: [fw-wiz] checkpoint port-redirection question" 
    To: "Paul Stewart" <pauls@nexicom.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 16:07:16 +0300

    for now, i'll be needing 2 firewalls. one <100 stations (but getting close),
    and the other of several 100's. these r 2 separate network w/ very limited
    datacom betwn them, each w/ multiple subnets w/ their own policies.

    i never saw my 2600 router on the small net breathing heavy. don't think
    i ever say it at >%10 cpu util. i'm relatively certain that it won't work
    too hard even w/ the fw feature set.

    another major concern of mine is multiple learning curves.
    how different is the user interface for configuring a policy on a pix box
    vs. the ios fw feature set?
    if i'm going to be saving only a small amnt of $, and if the configuration
    interface is significantly different, then i'll probably end up loosing in
    the end.
    tnx
    ams
    avraham shir-el
    director of computing center
    jerusalem college of technology - machon lev
    p. 972-2-675-1163

    > FROM - Paul Stewart <pauls@nexicom.net>
    > WHEN - 2 June 2003, 08:21
    > SUBJ - RE: [fw-wiz] pix vs. ios firewall feature set
    > TO - avraham@jct.ac.il, firewall-wizards@icsalabs.com
    >
    > I posed this question previously and was told that almost all features at
    > incorporated into the IOS. The features I use most are in both but I'm sure
    > there's features that are not in the IOS FW Feature Set.. Kinda wish someone
    > had a list of what's *not* in the IOS... Anyone? :)
    >
    > My adoption of using IOS for firewalling has been that of for small clients
    > (under 100 workstations).... Anything over 100 or so users I use a PIX box
    > specifically....
    >
    > Take care,
    >
    > Paul
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: firewall-wizards-admin@honor.icsalabs.com
    > [mailto:firewall-wizards-admin@honor.icsalabs.com] On Behalf Of avraham
    > shir-el (arthur sherman)
    > Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 5:33 PM
    > To: firewall-wizards@icsalabs.com
    > Subject: [fw-wiz] pix vs. ios firewall feature set
    >
    >
    >
    > gentlemen:
    > a cisco engineer recently told me that the plan for the above 2 products is
    > %100 feature convergence and that currently, there's about %80 of the
    > features of pix present in the ios firewall feature set. any comments as to
    > the reality of the above?
    >
    > tnx
    > ams
    > avraham shir-el
    > director of computing center
    > jerusalem college of technology - machon lev
    > p. 972-2-675-1163 _______________________________________________
    > firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    > http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
    >
    _______________________________________________
    firewall-wizards mailing list
    firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards

  • Next message: Douglas J Hunley: "Re: [fw-wiz] checkpoint port-redirection question"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: load-balancing t1s
      ... >> was under the impression that by simply having routes of equal costs ... Any one host only seems ... >> load-balancing t1s as using CIF, and our feature set (or IOS version) ...
      (comp.dcom.sys.cisco)
    • Re: load-balancing t1s
      ... > through both t1s, that packets would be spread among them, at least to ... Any one host only seems ... > load-balancing t1s as using CIF, and our feature set ... > I need to look at upgrading the IOS version, ...
      (comp.dcom.sys.cisco)
    • load-balancing t1s
      ... through both t1s, that packets would be spread among them, at least to some ... Any one host only seems ... and our feature set ... I need to look at upgrading the IOS version, ...
      (comp.dcom.sys.cisco)