Re: Opinions regarding Packeteer Packetshaper & alternatives

[Ramon Hermida <rhermida () PANAM EDU>]

I used Packetshaper extensively in a previous job.  I don't think we would have
been able to do much on our network without it.  I could do "shaping" of the
bandwidth either by IP address range or by traffic classifications (net radio,
p2p, etc).  The web-based GUI took a little getting used to, but it was not
overly complicated.  The Packethshaper appliance was very stable.  I remember
that it only froze up once in a period of 2 years.  The support was also top
notch.  Packetshaper also came with some canned reports that could be used right
out of the box to do trending.  It also came with some excellent command-line
features that could give you results without having to wait for the slower
web-based GUI.  I remember hunting down viruses using the command-line options :)

I also got to evaluate a trial box from Allot (NetEnforcer) and Lightspeed
(Lightspeed systems).  I guess the bigger questions here are:

1.  Is cost the biggest factor when it comes to selecting a solution?
2.  How big is your network, more than 2,500 hosts?
3.  Are you looking for additional features other than traffic shaping?

If cost is the biggest factor then don't go with Packetshaper, they are the most
expensive.  However, Packetshaper is highly scalable and can handle large
networks easily (more than 2,500 hosts).  Packetshaper also comes with a couple
of different models to handle various amounts of bandwidth.

If you are looking for additional features, lightspeed will do a better job.
Lightspeed can do Spam blocking, firewalling, load balancing, shaping, etc.
However, I think they can only candle smaller networks (as in less than 2,500
hosts).  Also, last time I checked Lightspeed was still running with a windows
OS, which makes me uncomfortable.

Hope this helps.

-RH

Ramon Hermida
Information Security Specialist
The University of Texas Pan American