Re: Palo Alto

[JR Ramirez <jrramirez30 () GMAIL COM>]

Local SEs are been outstanding; I was pleased with how much they went the
extra mile to help implement their solution and followed up with any trouble
tickets to make sure our concerns were addressed.  All support is internal
to Palo Alto.


On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Darnell Walker <
Darnell.Walker () utsouthwestern edu> wrote:

>  We are in the process of purchasing the PA-5060’s, but wanted to know
> about  the support overall and is it 3rd party?
>
>
>
>
>
> -darnell
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:
> SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU] *On Behalf Of *JR Ramirez
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 26, 2011 10:30 AM
>
> *To:* SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
> *Subject:* Re: [SECURITY] Palo Alto
>
>
>
> At my former employer we implemented PA-4060 in stand-alone mode after
> problems attempting to enable active-active on the 4.x code.  I highly
> suggest staying with the 3.1.x code.
>
>
>
> We have had issues with the box rebooting itself since we implemented it
> early this year.  We like the web content filtering functionality, however
> we were not pleased with the initial instability.  Before I left the plan
> was to replace the Checkpoint implementation with PA to enable next
> generation firewall capabilities and address Web 2.0 visibility.
>
>
>
> So to answer your question, I still like PA but make sure your are running
> a stable version of code.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Kellogg, Brian D. <bkellogg () sbu edu>
> wrote:
>
> Looking for real world experiences on the stability and support services of
> the Palo Alto Firewalls if anyone is willing to share.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> UT Southwestern Medical Center
> The future of medicine, today.