Re: NAC RFI/RFP

[Jim Kieley <Jim.Kieley () LLS EDU>]

Ditto on no RFP. We first deployed Cisco Clean Access (CCA) 5+ years ago 
right after they acquired it from Protego. We have upgraded the hardware 
once and the software several times over the years. Last summer we went 
looking for a possible alternative product as our NAC manager/server 
appliances we're being replaced with new higher-end models. Cisco seldom 
offers much in terms of trade-in credit. Of the systems we looked at, 
Bradford seemed the most compelling until we found out a system with the 
minimal licensing we would require would cost significantly more than 
new Cisco appliances. I spoke with people at a few sites using Bradford 
and other products and the performance feedback was mixed much as mine 
would would be if asked about CCA. I also spoke with someone at Gartner 
and a person I met who does security consulting for private industry and 
government agencies. The consensus (a year ago) was that NAC is an area 
that isn't/wasn't quite there yet. Until the next generation of tools 
arrives, it was recommended that we hold off making a change which is 
what we have done (although we continue to upgrade CCA software). This 
decision was reinforced when we looked at a review Gartner did last year 
of NAC products. For all of it's imperfections, Gartner rated Cisco's 
solution most highly in it's "magic quadrant for Network Access Control."

--
Jim Kieley
Chief Technology Officer
Loyola Law School
Email: Jim.Kieley () lls edu
Phone: (213) 736-1470
FAX: (213) 380-3769 



James R. Pardonek wrote:
> We did not do an RFP either. We selected the Enterasys solution which 
> works on any vendor’s gear.
>
> Jim
>
> James R. Pardonek, CISSP
>
> Senior Network Administrator
>
> Purdue University Calumet Data Network
>
> Information Services
>
> Purdue University Calumet
>
> Hammond, Indiana
>
> *From:* The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv 
> [mailto:SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU] *On Behalf Of *Terence Ma
> *Sent:* Monday, June 21, 2010 6:10 PM
> *To:* SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
> *Subject:* Re: [SECURITY] NAC RFI/RFP
>
> We did not go through a RFP process. Early on, we decided that we 
> needed a hardware based solution. We closely examined (and received 
> quotations) from Bradford, Impulse, and Trustwave. While all the 
> products were excellent, we ended up spending several months looking 
> at the differences between Bradford and impulse. We ended up selecting 
> Bradford and it is in the process of being installed right now.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> *Terence Ma, Ph.D. *
>
> Chief Information Officer
>
> Touro University Nevada
>
> 874 American Pacific Drive
>
> Henderson, NV 89014, USA
>
> P: 702-777-1805
>
> M: 702-469-1770
>
> F: 702-777-1736
>
> E: terence.ma () tun touro edu <mailto:terence.ma () tun touro edu>
>
> *From:* The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv 
> [mailto:SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU] *On Behalf Of *Baker, Lori
> *Sent:* Monday, June 21, 2010 3:41 PM
> *To:* SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
> *Subject:* [SECURITY] NAC RFI/RFP
>
> Hello EDUCAUSE Colleagues –
>
> Does anyone have a NAC (Network Access Control) RFP/RFI they’re 
> willing to share? We’re just starting to define our requirements and 
> investigate vendors, and would greatly appreciate input from other 
> institutions. Our NAC solution would be for both our administrative 
> (staff/faculty) and academic networks/users.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Lori
>
> --
>
> *Lori D. Baker*
>
> Sr Manager, Network & Telephony
>
> Information Technology
>
> *DeVry Inc. *
>
> 814 Commerce Drive
>
> Oak Brook, IL 60523-8822
>
> phone: 630.572.8015
>
> internal: 1988015
>
> cell: 773.255.4335
>
> fax: 630.382.2941
>
> email: lobaker () devry com <mailto:lobaker () devry com>
>
> www.devryinc.com <http://www.devry.edu/>
>
> cid:7277AD6D-B09D-4DE4-806F-8D7C8500E760