Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

I am interested to hear about the uses and practical applications of
the Cisco PIX 501, 506, 515, and 525. Please let me know the
application and why that specific firewall would be chosen. Thanks
for your help.

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Hi,

cimjac1 <jcordray@cimco.net> wrote:
> I am interested to hear about the uses and practical applications of
> the Cisco PIX 501, 506, 515, and 525.

Perfect qeustion for your friendly cisco sales guy.

> Please let me know the
> application and why that specific firewall would be chosen.

Have you even started to read http://www.cisco.com/ ?
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/product [...] index.html
discusses the Cisco Pix 500 family...

Two obvious clicks away:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/product [...] _home.html

we learn:

Cisco PIX 525 Firewall
Gigabit Ethernet-ready, modular security appliance for medium-to-large enterprise network environments

Cisco PIX 515E Firewall
Modular, high performance security appliance for small-to-medium business and enterprise network environments

Cisco PIX 506E Firewall
Cost-effective, high performance security appliance for remote office/branch office environments

Cisco PIX 501 Firewall
Compact, plug-n-play security appliance for small office/home office environments

> Thanks
> for your help.

You are welcome. You have overlooked the highend 500 Pix: 535...

Greetings,
Jens

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

<snip>
You have overlooked the highend 500 Pix: 535...
<snip>

or the even higher end, pix blade

SysAdm

ps. to the original poster: go read about the pix at cisco.com

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Hi,

SysAdm <me@here.com> wrote:
> or the even higher end, pix blade

The pix blade is no pix 500 series.

I have to admit, that I ignored the EOL products.

Greetings,
Jens

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Jens Hoffmann <jh@bofh.de> wrote in
news:slrncen44r.2r8.jh@churrasco.bofh.de:

> Hi,
>
> SysAdm <me@here.com> wrote:
>> or the even higher end, pix blade
>
> The pix blade is no pix 500 series.
>
> I have to admit, that I ignored the EOL products.
>
> Greetings,
> Jens

agreed Jens, it isnt a 500 series. I was just being picky as Im not sure
the poster new.

SysAdm

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

So basically you are saying the number of users it what
differientiates the models. I was just wandering if there were
reasons other than size of office that would require higher models.

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

jcordray@cimco.net (cimjac1) wrote in news:5cc92e04.0407080741.66e4dd46
@posting.google.com:

> So basically you are saying the number of users it what
> differientiates the models. I was just wandering if there were
> reasons other than size of office that would require higher models.
>

connections per second
throughput
max number of interfaces
interface type selection

its not just about the number of users - in fact in many scenarios, the
number of users is much less relevant than the connections per second
capacity (ie. application hosting)

SysAdm