Re: [FW1] Nokia vs. NT

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

Hmmm....  so to stoke the fire further, NT beats UNIX AND Nokia with respect
to VPN-1 throughput.  Hmmmm..


----- Original Message -----
From: James W. Klein <jwk@s-s-s.com>
To: Larry Pingree <larry@siegeworks.com>;
<fw-1-mailinglist@lists.us.checkpoint.com>
Sent: 16 February 2001 20:43
Subject: Re: [FW1] Nokia vs. NT


>
> This might be interesting... not exactly apples to apples (dual procs vs
one
> proc; encryption thrown in;  different memory; etc.)...
>
> http://www.checkpoint.com/products/vpn1/vpn1perfdata.html
>
> Semaj..
>
> ----- 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: Thursday, February 15, 2001 1:43 PM
> 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
> >
>
============================================================================
> ====
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> > This message has been checked for all known viruses, by Star Internet,
> > delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre.
> > For further information visit:
> > http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
============================================================================
> ====
> >      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
================================================================================