Re: [FW1] HA Comparison

["Jason Witty, CISSP" <jason@FW1-NOSPAMwittys.com>]

A bunch of us on the list are compiling a FAQ for questions like this at
http://www.hanetworks.com.  It's not there yet, but lots of other HA
information that you might find useful is (and if anyone reading this wants
to help out, we're taking submissions ;-)

To answer your question, the only real *opinion* I have is that:

1) The Check point HA module is fairly new and probably hasn't gone through
all of the testing that a solution like Rainwall or Stonebeat has
2) AFAIK, current versions of the CP HA module only support fault based
failover, not load balancing (although I hear they're working on it)
3) CP HA requires a separate license and more money.  Rainwall and
Stonebeat aren't cheap either, but for the money and licensing hassle, I'd
choose one of those two over the CP solution until it's at least tested a
bit more thoroughly.  Rainfinity and Stonesoft also have a bit of room to
"play" with their licensing, whereas Check Point is pretty rigid on that
sort of thing.

Any one else have ideas?

Jason

At 09:57 AM 3/12/01 +0800, Maureen A. Jacob wrote:
>
>
>
>What are the pros and cons of using the High Availability Module of
>Checkpoint as compared to using third party solutions like Stonebeat?
>
>Thanks.
>
>
>
>===========================================================================
=====
>     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
================================================================================