[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [FW1] Multiple WAN Links.
The router itself you can get for around $1500 plus CSU/DSU or whatever module you need for the type of lines. http://www.canada.cnet.com/shopping/resellers/0-95-0.html Andrew Bagrin Network Analyst Regal Cinemas, Inc. 7132 Commercial Park Drive Knoxville, TN 37918>>> "iden fw" <[email protected]> 11/07/00 10:52AM >>> Andrew, Great information -- so the 36XX series router is not necessary. Brings the price-point down... What is the ball-park price of a 2524? I prefer to use BGP for circuit and routing redundancy as well. I still think that Rainfinity/Stonebeat definitely has a place -- but for load balancing/failover/HA of the firewalls. As far as DSL, my opinion is that "it depends". If you're close enough to the CO to get 768k or better, I say go for it. Especially because DSL boxes like Netopia let you bond DSL circuits. One thing to consider with DSL is the provider -- does the DSL provider own the local loop, DSLAM, network, and the router that your DSL connection terminates on? I have seen some ISPs that have telco carry the circuit to a DSLAM owned by Rhytms/Northpoint/Covad/etc. The DSL carrier then carries the circuit across their network, where they hand it off to the ISP on a DS-3 containing many DSL circuits. -iden_fw >From: "Andrew Bagrin" <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> >CC: <[email protected]> >Subject: RE: [FW1] Multiple WAN Links. >Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 09:29:24 -0500 > > >I have a 2524 with 14m of processor memory running BGP between two >different ISP's, and it works fine. >Rainwall is excellent for load balancing firewalls, but for Internet >connections, I'd stick with BGP. I know it work, I've been running it for >over a year now. My firewalls have been load balanced behind my ISP BGP >connection for almost one year. > >Andrew Bagrin >Network Analyst > >Regal Cinemas, Inc. >7132 Commercial Park Drive >Knoxville, TN 37918 > >> > >>> "Mark L. Decker" <[email protected]> 11/06/00 05:35PM >>> > > > The only point that I would make is that you have to have a > > router for connectivity -- so the only price increase is the additional > > RAM, and if you are upgrading from a 26XX series to a 36XX series router > > (which is not inexpensive, granted). > >True. Upgrading from the default 32M DRAM to 128M DRAM on a 3640 will >"only" >cost $5,760 per router. ;-) But that assumes you already have two 3640s. >Most people who have T1 internet access have a single lower-end router like >a 2600 or 1700 series Cisco. For them, a move to fully-redundant routers >running BGP/HSRP means buying two brand new routers. And, that only >addresses the ISP link and router redundancy. They still haven't >eliminated >the firewall as a single point of failure. If you want to protect all >three, you're looking at some sort of firewall HA solution anyway. > >So, let's look at total purchase price for a fully redundant setup with >BGP/HSRP vs. a fully redundant setup using RainWall: > >Secure, fully redundant T1 access with BGP/HSRP >pair of 3640 routers: $30,920 ($15,460 x 2, includes T1 CSU/DSUs) >firewall HA solution: $12,000 (based on RainWall with LB) >TOTAL LIST PRICE: $42,920 (does not include firewalls themselves) > >Secure, fully redundant T1 access with RainWall >pair of 1720 routers: $ 4,390 ($2,195 x 2, includes T1 CSU/DSUs) >firewall HA solution: $12,000 (based on RainWall with LB) >TOTAL LIST PRICE: $16,390 (does not include firewalls themselves) > >That's a big price difference. Plus, if you already have a T1 router, you >can subtract another $2,195 from the cost of the RainWall solution. If >transparent failover for inbound connections is worth $28,725 to you (and >it >may be if you're hosting an e-commerce website internally), then BGP is >still the best answer. But if you just want increased capacity and >automatic failover for regular outbound browsing and email, RainWall can be >a useful, less-expensive alternative. > >While we're on the subject of cost, consider this: How much could you save >on access costs by replacing your T1 with DSL? Most people wouldn't dare, >because DSL is typically not quite as fast or reliable as a T1. But if you >had multiple redundant DSL links... Something to think about, anyway. ;-) > > > >================================================================================ > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at > http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html >================================================================================ > > > >================================================================================ > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at > http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html >================================================================================ _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ================================================================================ To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html ================================================================================
|