Re: [fw-wiz] Opinion: Worst interface ever.

From: Ian Rae (irae_at_syntenic.com)
Date: 07/06/05

  • Next message: Paul D. Robertson: "[fw-wiz] Watchguard update"
    To: firewall-wizards@icsalabs.com
    Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:42:52 -0400
    
    

    Was expecting a more technical discussion for my introduction to this
    mailing list but while we're on the topic of touchie-feelies:

    Watchguard OS
    I don't know pre 8.0 Watchguard well but I like Fireware 8.0 functionality
    and interface a lot, and when that has failed us for certain operations
    the CLI has not failed us. The Gold release was missing routes for the HA
    fuctionality on the X2500 platform (a somewhat critical omission I should
    add) and it was a pretty quick correction via CLI. Based on our
    requirements I doubt I would ever use the non-fireware code so I can't
    contribute there. I believe they will try to bring the fireware code to
    their entire product line but currently it is only available on the CORE
    and PEAK series.

    Watchguard Support
    We learned quite quickly that standard Watchguard support is sub par due
    in part to the fact that it seems to be outsourced to India. We found that
    to get good support you either need to appeal to your local Sales Engineer
    or become a certified partner which gets you superior support from
    engineers in North America.

    We are heavy Netscreen users and are (so far) very happy with Watchguard's
    competing solutions. We're looking forward to working with the Firebox
    Peak product in the near future.

    -I

    On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 12:11:08 -0400, Paul D. Robertson <paul@compuwar.net>
    wrote:

    > On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Mark Teicher wrote:
    >
    >> You may want call technical support ahead of time and schedule lots
    >> of offline time to configure it properly or all your email might end
    >> up in /dev/null. :(
    >
    > I'll reiterate that things are functioning fine once I get a rule that
    > works the way I expect it to (I've been tcpdumping and testing as I make
    > changes to the rules.) The box (a major plus) will not allow the traffic
    > when I have it seemingly configured correctly, but not to its liking- so
    > I think from a security perspective the box is doing the right thing-
    > we're just not speaking the same language, or the initial configuration
    > has some issues[1]. Once the rules are in place, I get fully functional,
    > including over reboots.
    >
    > Watchguard has been good in getting hold of me and I have a support call
    > scheduled for this afternoon- we'll see how that goes, but so far they've
    > done all the right things and none of the wrong ones.
    >
    > Paul
    > [1] Which if it is true, is something else that'll need to be addressed.
    > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal
    > opinions
    > paul@compuwar.net which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
    > _______________________________________________
    > firewall-wizards mailing list
    > firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    > http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards

    -- 
    Ian Rae
    Syntenic Inc.
    514-277-2654
    txt: iantxt@syntenic.com
    _______________________________________________
    firewall-wizards mailing list
    firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
    http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
    

  • Next message: Paul D. Robertson: "[fw-wiz] Watchguard update"