Re: [FW1] Nokia vs. NT

["Tim Holman" <tim_holman@FW1-NOSPAMhotmail.com>]

Sorry - I got my facts wrong - if you compare hardware with similar
processors in, then Linux comes first, then IPSO, then RS/6000, then
Solaris, and then NT.

http://www.checkpoint.com/products/firewall-1/pbrief.html

However, if you can't afford a Nokia 660 and can only afford say a 330 or
440, then for what your money buys you, you could easily afford a fast
dual-processor box and run NT on it, and it will be faster, which is sort of
more what I meant.
Still, Linux is King when it comes to FW-1, and it's free...

:)

Tim


----- Original Message -----
From: Larry Pingree <larry@siegeworks.com>
To: Tim Holman <tim_holman@hotmail.com>; Tim Anderson
<TAnderson@spectrumhealth.com>; <fw-1-mailinglist@lists.us.checkpoint.com>
Sent: 15 February 2001 19:43
Subject: Re: [FW1] Nokia vs. NT


>
> Tim, please refer me to where you have seen these NT comparasons to the
> Nokia, when I worked at Nokia, I've never seen numbers that reflected
slower
> times on a Nokia compared with NT, I cannot imagine an NT box passing
> packets faster than Unix. Thanks!
>
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Larry Pingree
> Sr. Security Consultant
> Email: larry@siegeworks.com
>
> SiegeWorks
> Company WebSite: http://www.siegeworks.com/
> Security Installation, Training and Consulting
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tim Holman <tim_holman@hotmail.com>
> To: Tim Anderson <TAnderson@spectrumhealth.com>;
> <fw-1-mailinglist@lists.us.checkpoint.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 11:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [FW1] Nokia vs. NT
>
>
> >
> > Redundancy yes, load balancing no.  At least not yet....
> > Nokia's are just PCs with fancy, small, rackmountable boxes, running
> > FreeBSD.
> > They are reliable, and can be made into a fault tolerant pair, but then
so
> > can NT and the other platforms, + you can load share using Stonebeat.
> > If I had to spec up firewalls again, I'd probably choose NT, as Nokia
did
> > seem rather expensive for the task in hand, and benchmarks show that the
> > Nokia platform is actually slower than the equivalent PC running NT.
> > Then again, I'd probably change my mind, as the Nokia's are very easy to
> > setup - stick them in, pre-hardened, load up firewall + the licenses and
> > away you go.
> > Saves faffing around with NT, but if you already know how to harden NT,
it
> > doesn't take too long to faff around with it !
> > Stick with what you know....  it will cost you less !
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Tim Anderson <TAnderson@spectrumhealth.com>
> > To: <fw-1-mailinglist@lists.us.checkpoint.com>
> > Sent: 15 February 2001 16:51
> > Subject: [FW1] Nokia vs. NT
> >
> >
> > >
> > > We are looking into switching our existing Firewall platform from
> NT/Win2K
> > > to Nokia.  I am curious to see how those of you using Checkpoint on
> Nokia
> > > like it.
> > > We are hoping that this switch will lower down time and decrease
> > > administrative overhead.  The specific model we are planning to
purchase
> > is
> > > the Nokia 440.  We plan to purchase two to provide load balancing and
> > > redundancy.
> > > Of course our vendor likes our plan but I want to hear from some
admins
> > that
> > > are actually supporting this platform.  Thanks in advance!
> > >
> > > Tim Anderson
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
============================================================================
> > ====
> > >      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
> >
>
============================================================================
> ====
> >
>
>
>
>
============================================================================
====
>      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
================================================================================