Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall bake-off?
- From: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:51:02 +0100
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 09:59:03AM -0700, Jim MacLeod wrote:
On 3/20/07, Zachary Grafton <chaotic.chowder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Well, the greatest thing about the sidewinder is how easy it is to
configure things. It does have clustering and nice failover features,
which are in my opinion, extremely important. If you are worried about
performance with a Sidewinder, just buy another one and cluster them.
Does it support active-active load splitting? Or do you need an
external load balancer for that? How destructive is the transition
when one fails? How extensive is the state sync? Will it scale to
n+1, or is it limited to 2 firewalls?
Active-active with 2 units. Needs external load balancer for N > 2.
But facilitates policy configuration by "one-to-many" cluster mode,
i.e. you configure policy once for N firewalls.
Beware: active-active uses layer 2 multicast - which may be an issue if
your Internet uplink, is, say, 34 M and you have servers directly behind
or in front of the firewall on a 100 Mbit/s LAN. Your switches will
broadcast all traffic to the firewalls to all ports in the same collision
domain. Layer 3 separation of DMZ LANs recommended.
Patrick M. Hausen
punkt.de GmbH * Vorholzstr. 25 * 76137 Karlsruhe
Tel. 0721 9109 0 * Fax 0721 9109 100
Gf: Jürgen Egeling AG Mannheim 108285
firewall-wizards mailing list
- Prev by Date: Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall bake-off?
- Next by Date: Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall bake-off?
- Previous by thread: Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall bake-off?
- Next by thread: Re: [fw-wiz] Firewall bake-off?