From: Howard C. Berkowitz (hcb@gettcomm.com)
Date: Thu Mar 25 2004 - 17:39:48 GMT-3
At 2:54 PM -0500 3/25/04, Scott Morris wrote:
>ASICs are cool as long as the things they are coded for don't change...
>That makes things interesting (e.g. potentially problematic) for new
>features that are done entirely in software. (killing the performance
>'boost')
Cisco sometimes makes it seem like there's only one kind of ASIC, and
it's unchangeable. While I'm not a solid state designer, I got close
enough to some of the Nortel hardware people to learn there's a whole
spectrum of things that are more specialized than a RISC processor,
but still are field alterable in some ways. In some cases, that
alteration may be a removable chip in a socket, but in other cases,
it might be something like an electrically alterable EEPROM for a
microcode sequencer, and I believe there are now electrically
alterable field-programmable logic gate arrays.
An "ASIC" often is actually a chipset rather than a single chip.
Alternatively, some custom chips/chipsets are really fairly standard
microcode sequencers or even RISC processors, but with the firmware
decoded and on chip.
>
>But like any project, you assess your customers needs (now and future) and
>place a proper box from there. The 'shootouts' are fun, but also don't
>provide a total picture of functionality, or provide a view of what the
>picture will look like throughout the total term of ownership.
>
>Both have their strong points. Both have their weak points. I don't see
>any problem with Juniper acquiring netscreen unless they go and lay off all
>of the good technical people (which I don't see happening). Otherwise,
>merging will occur, and things will eventually mesh nicely. Until then,
>it'll be the same company with a different name and logo!
>
>I do agree though, that the price a consultant can get for their services
>shouldn't really be any different. Unless you're comparing larger companies
>using a PIX to smaller ones using Netscreen. But all else being equal, the
>fees should be able to be the same.
>
>
>Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, CISSP,
>JNCIS, et al.
>IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
>IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
>swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
>http://www.ipexpert.net
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>Chris Larson
>Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 2:16 PM
>To: Wright, Jeremy; security@groupstudy.com
>Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: RE: PIX vs. Netscreen
>
>It has been some time since I have worked with Netscreen, but I have noticed
>they continually beat out competition including Cisco in most firewall
>"shootouts". I am concerned about Juniper now owning them as Juniper has no
>experience in the firewall/security market but that is probably minor... who
>knows.
>
>The netscreen is gui through a browser, lacks (or did) any good debugging
>for troubleshooting but is very simple. If you understand the basics of
>firewalling and VPN this is very easy to deploy. At the time Netscreen was
>about to introduce the 1000 that was vlan aware. Of course now so is the
>FWSM but. I think the netscreen is an excellent and easy to use product for
>its pricing that apparently outperforms most other firewalls according to
>independant "shootouts".. I would imagine that has to do with the design
>around ASICS rather then a processor. Price to performance, you prolly can't
>beat it. Feature wise though it may be lacking....
>
>Chris #12380
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wright, Jeremy [mailto:wright@admworld.com]
> Sent: Wed 3/24/2004 11:35 AM
> To: 'security@groupstudy.com'
> Cc: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> Subject: PIX vs. Netscreen
>
>
>
> Has anyone had experience with both of these products? If so, what
>are the advantages/disadvantages of both? Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *****************************************
> Jeremy Wright
> CCIE# 11168
> Network Engineer
> Archer Daniels Midland
> wright@admworld.com
> (217)451-4063
>
> *****************************************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
> This message is intended for the use of the individual or
>entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
>privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
>If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee
>or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient,
>you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of
>this communication is strictly prohibited.
> If you have received this communication in error, please
>notify us immediately by email reply or by telephone and immediately delete
>this message and any attachments. In the U.S. call us toll free at (800)
>637-5843.
> Spanish, French, French (Canada), Portuguese, Polish,
>German, Dutch, Turkish, Russian, Japanese and Chinese:
>http://www.admworld.com/confidentiality.htm.
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Apr 01 2004 - 08:15:47 GMT-3