Good mid size company router/gateway ideas? VPN solutions (Ssl)? Current choices ...

Good mid size company router/gateway ideas? VPN solutions (Ssl)? Current choices ...
Secure Home | Search | About
Login Password
Register Now! Lost Password?
 Networking Firewalls    Post an article   get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content add this group's latest topics to your Google content
Subject Author Date
Good mid size company router/gateway ideas? VPN solutions (Ssl)? Current choices ... markm75 10-18-2007
Posted by markm75 on October 18, 2007, 10:20 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
We are researching replacing our existing (and frequently locking up)
Symantec Gateway 460 gateway (was a $650 device). Currently it has
the firewall and vpn built in (ipsec). This unit requires that end
users use proprietary vpn software, rather than just creating a
windows vpn connection.. this software doesnt work in x64 Vista (or
Vista period). We also have installed pptp vpn on a backend server
and use this as an alternate for now.

We have a 15 mbit Comcast cable connection (1mbit upload) and a 3mbit
verizon connection (1mbit upload max).. We have about 10 users at the
moment (out of 42) who use VPN, usually only about 3-4 at a time
though.

I'd really like an all in one solution that was VPN SSL capable (i'm
assuming this means the end user wouldnt need proprietary software,
just an SSL certificate and a connection in most cases?).. but it
seems most are breaking the two apart these days?

Here are my current choices.. any thoughts on these or perhaps others
out there i haven't thought of? (perhaps cheaper ones that are just as
good)? We need to have dual wan ability in either case though..

Gateways:

Sonicwall Pro 2040 Internet Security Appliance: (dual wan able) 01-
SSC-5700 $1339.88 (24x7 support option 01-SSC-5707 = $350.97)
**No SSL vpn ability need separate unit, see below (has standard 10
license, ipsec vpn ability); 200mbps on firewall and 50mps on vpn

Juniper SSG-140-SH $2569
** 350mbps on firewall; 100 mbps on vpn



Secondary vpn device:
SonicWall SSL-VPN 2000 01-SSC-5952 $1691 (unlimited users)
*Nice interface via the web, does require a small app installed via
the web to directly connect though.


Any thoughts?


Posted by Mr. Arnold on October 18, 2007, 12:31 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options

> We are researching replacing our existing (and frequently locking up)
> Symantec Gateway 460 gateway (was a $650 device). Currently it has
> the firewall and vpn built in (ipsec). This unit requires that end
> users use proprietary vpn software, rather than just creating a
> windows vpn connection.. this software doesnt work in x64 Vista (or
> Vista period). We also have installed pptp vpn on a backend server
> and use this as an alternate for now.

Why did the company get Vista 64 bit? A whole lot of things don't work with
Vista 64 bit at this time. What they should have gotten was Vista 32 bit.
Some vendors as of yet have not caught up with the requirements to run their
solution on or against the Vista platform. Vendors are working on this,
because they have no choice if they want to make money, but some are still
lagging behind.

>
>
> Any thoughts?
>

First, you have to find a solution that's Vista compliant *period*. The
solution that is Vista compliant will be designated as such. I understand
that 32bit Vista compliant solutions work on the 64 bit platform. You need
to start checking with vendors and check that their solutions are Vista
compliant.


I doubt you're going to find anything worthy of a VPN solution but it's a
shot.

http://www.bestvistadownloads.com/software-search.html?keywords_and=vpn+software&keywords_exact%5B%5D=&keywords_or=&keywords_not=&category_id=0&licence=0&price=&p=25&u=0&s=d

You find something that's Vista compliant, you dual boot Vista/Windows XP or
you might be able to use PC2007.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/virtualpc/default.mspx

Someone should have done their homework before he or she made the decision
to run off and use Vista, and most don't do it.


Posted by markm75 on October 18, 2007, 1:20 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>
>
> > We are researching replacing our existing (and frequently locking up)
> > SymantecGateway460gateway(was a $650 device). Currently it has
> > the firewall and vpn built in (ipsec). This unit requires that end
> > users use proprietary vpn software, rather than just creating a
> > windows vpn connection.. this software doesnt work in x64 Vista (or
> > Vista period). We also have installed pptp vpn on a backend server
> > and use this as an alternate for now.
>
> Why did the company get Vista 64 bit? A whole lot of things don't work with
> Vista 64 bit at this time. What they should have gotten was Vista 32 bit.
> Some vendors as of yet have not caught up with the requirements to run their
> solution on or against the Vista platform. Vendors are working on this,
> because they have no choice if they want to make money, but some are still
> lagging behind.
>


I've been running x64 at home now for well over a year.. no issues
whatsoever, minus the fact that symantec vpn client doesnt work on
anything vista (but i use pptp vpn to get in, not a huge deal, if i
throw on an ssl cert, it would be perfectly secure).. this only
affects 1 person, myself.. Btw.. i run a TON of apps on x64 and i
have a lot of hardware, all of which work and have drivers.

As far as the company side.. we do have two users, using x64
internally, without any issues as well.

We also run 4gb of memory on most of these power systems, so x64 uses
the full segment of 4gb, not just 3.5gb etc..

Its my opinion that if you have a beefy system, want it to be more
secure (as x64 is by default), run 4gb of memory or more, than at this
point in time, most of the time going with x64 isnt a bad choice..
heck even games run fine.



Posted by Mr. Arnold on October 18, 2007, 1:46 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options

>>
>>
>> > We are researching replacing our existing (and frequently locking up)
>> > SymantecGateway460gateway(was a $650 device). Currently it has
>> > the firewall and vpn built in (ipsec). This unit requires that end
>> > users use proprietary vpn software, rather than just creating a
>> > windows vpn connection.. this software doesnt work in x64 Vista (or
>> > Vista period). We also have installed pptp vpn on a backend server
>> > and use this as an alternate for now.
>>
>> Why did the company get Vista 64 bit? A whole lot of things don't work
>> with
>> Vista 64 bit at this time. What they should have gotten was Vista 32 bit.
>> Some vendors as of yet have not caught up with the requirements to run
>> their
>> solution on or against the Vista platform. Vendors are working on this,
>> because they have no choice if they want to make money, but some are
>> still
>> lagging behind.
>>
>
>
> I've been running x64 at home now for well over a year.. no issues
> whatsoever, minus the fact that symantec vpn client doesnt work on
> anything vista (but i use pptp vpn to get in, not a huge deal, if i
> throw on an ssl cert, it would be perfectly secure).. this only
> affects 1 person, myself.. Btw.. i run a TON of apps on x64 and i
> have a lot of hardware, all of which work and have drivers.
>
> As far as the company side.. we do have two users, using x64
> internally, without any issues as well.
>
> We also run 4gb of memory on most of these power systems, so x64 uses
> the full segment of 4gb, not just 3.5gb etc..
>
> Its my opinion that if you have a beefy system, want it to be more
> secure (as x64 is by default), run 4gb of memory or more, than at this
> point in time, most of the time going with x64 isnt a bad choice..
> heck even games run fine.
>
>

I got Vista 32bit Ultimate, and I have no problems with it. All you have to
do is step into a Vista NG to see the many problems users are having with
any version of Vista 32 and 64 bit at this time.

And all you have to do is ask a .NET developer about the woes of using Vista
64 bit anything.

But again, it all depends upon who is sitting behind the wheel and is doing
the driving.


Posted by markm75 on October 18, 2007, 10:10 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> > We are researching replacing our existing (and frequently locking up)
> >> > SymantecGateway460gateway(was a $650 device). Currently it has
> >> > the firewall and vpn built in (ipsec). This unit requires that end
> >> > users use proprietary vpn software, rather than just creating a
> >> > windows vpn connection.. this software doesnt work in x64 Vista (or
> >> > Vista period). We also have installed pptp vpn on a backend server
> >> > and use this as an alternate for now.
>
> >> Why did the company get Vista 64 bit? A whole lot of things don't work
> >> with
> >> Vista 64 bit at this time. What they should have gotten was Vista 32 bit.
> >> Some vendors as of yet have not caught up with the requirements to run
> >> their
> >> solution on or against the Vista platform. Vendors are working on this,
> >> because they have no choice if they want to make money, but some are
> >> still
> >> lagging behind.
>
> > I've been running x64 at home now for well over a year.. no issues
> > whatsoever, minus the fact that symantec vpn client doesnt work on
> > anything vista (but i use pptp vpn to get in, not a huge deal, if i
> > throw on an ssl cert, it would be perfectly secure).. this only
> > affects 1 person, myself.. Btw.. i run a TON of apps on x64 and i
> > have a lot of hardware, all of which work and have drivers.
>
> > As far as the company side.. we do have two users, using x64
> > internally, without any issues as well.
>
> > We also run 4gb of memory on most of these power systems, so x64 uses
> > the full segment of 4gb, not just 3.5gb etc..
>
> > Its my opinion that if you have a beefy system, want it to be more
> > secure (as x64 is by default), run 4gb of memory or more, than at this
> > point in time, most of the time going with x64 isnt a bad choice..
> > heck even games run fine.
>
> I got Vista 32bit Ultimate, and I have no problems with it. All you have to
> do is step into a Vista NG to see the many problems users are having with
> any version of Vista 32 and 64 bit at this time.
>
> And all you have to do is ask a .NET developer about the woes of using Vista
> 64 bit anything.
>

Offtopic again, but i must confess:

Actually, where i work, we have 2 people running x64 Vista with .net
2005, inclusive of myself without any issues.






Similar ThreadsPosted
Replacement ideas for Iprism April 6, 2005, 10:36 am
OT: Bios problems; any ideas on "fixing"? March 8, 2007, 10:41 pm
Sonicwall Pro 330 current stability July 5, 2005, 12:51 pm
Current Sendmail and SMAP (fwtk) June 30, 2006, 2:55 pm
Difference between the older NetScreen-5XP an the current -5XT September 18, 2006, 12:44 pm
Re: REQ: Serial for iPhoto Library Manager 3.2.6 or current September 29, 2007, 7:55 pm
Maybe Jetico isn't so annoying afterall. Try this on for size. April 2, 2006, 10:31 pm
VPN Choices October 12, 2005, 11:16 am
Firewall product from SecuElite Taiwan company. November 9, 2004, 11:48 pm
Easily bypass your company firewall with aplusproxy.com September 29, 2006, 5:47 am

The site map in XML format XML site map

Contact Us | Privacy Policy