Re:Firewall Utilization

[Brian Ford <brford () cisco com>]

Joe,

Hmm.

> After working with a few different companies firewalls, I have found
> that most are under utilized and often less expensive models could of
> sufficed.

So are you saying that most people should buy smaller, less powerful, less 
capable, less expensive Firewalls?  If you are lucky and you never get 
probed or hacked you don't need a Firewall at all.  Right?

Architecturally, shouldn't the Firewall be a part of your overall network 
design and thus specified based on a wide variety of factors (more than 
just average CPU and memory utilization)?  If your Firewall administers 
policy between a T-1 line and a 10/100 switch then you don't need GigE 
interfaces.  No?

I don't know if I see your point here?  Where is this going?

Liberty for All,

Brian

At 03:49 PM 10/15/2002 -0400, Joe Keegan <joe () jjk3 com> wrote:

> Message: 5
> From: Joe Keegan <joe () jjk3 com>
> To: Firewall Wizards Mailing List <firewall-wizards () nfr com>
> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 09:43:22 -0700
> Subject: [fw-wiz] Firewall Utilization
>
> I was curious if anyone would be willing to share the average
> utilization (CPU/Mem) of their firewalls and the average amount of
> traffic they deal with.
>
> After working with a few different companies firewalls, I have found
> that most are under utilized and often less expensive models could of
> sufficed. If you are not willing to share your utilization details,
> could you comment on your general experience with firewall utilization.
>
> Thanks
>
> Joe
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Joe Keegan - joe () jjk3 com - (408)242-4588
> SANS GSEC & GCFW, CCSE, CCNA, CCDA, Sun Certified

_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards