Re: High Speed Firewalls

[Robert Graham <robert_david_graham () yahoo com>]

I think their may be some confusion between "gigabit" and "gigabyte".

Also, from your description, it sounds like you don't need a "firewall" but
basic packet filtering. A Cisco router can handle gigabits/second and can carry
out this basic level of filtering.

A high-end commercial firewall is good when you have a huge series of security
needs that you want centralized: dynamic filters, VPN, NAT, proxy, etc. It is
an extremely poor solution if you need high-speed, basic static packet filters.
Any commercial firewall is overkill for such simple needs; you'll like find
what you need in a packet-filtering router.

Rob.

--- Henry Baez <hbaez () eos hitc com> wrote:
> I am doing research on very high speed firewalls.  I mean firewalls that
> are right now available that could handle OC3 and higher speeds via Gig
> Byte Etherenet cards.  In searching the recent posting of this list and
> a lot of general web searching, I have found only one firewall that
> claims they can do so.  It is call POTUS from a company called Livermore
> Software Laboratories.  I would very much like to find at lease another
> vendor which at lease matches the claim of PORTUS, 300 MB plus through
> put.  Management, bless them, likes to have choices, I would like to
> present more then one vendor if possiable.
>
> I have experiences with two commercial firewalls, Checkpoint and
> Gauntlet, and one freeware firewall, Ipfilter.  But the links where way
> under 10 Meg Byte.  None of the firewalls I have work on 'claim' the
> speeds I am looking for.  All the magazines 'test/reviews' I have looked
> at top out at about 150 Meg. Byte.  The number of users for this project
> would not be large, but each one would be moving Gig Byte size files
> across the world.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Henry Baez
> hbaez () eos hitc com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com