tion, not sure why rule X is in there,
things of this nature).
-Pete
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Tony Varriale wrote:
>
> - Original Message - From: "gordon b slater"
> To: "Tony Varriale"
> Cc:
> Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 4:38 AM
> Sub
- Original Message -
From: "gordon b slater"
To: "Tony Varriale"
Cc:
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 4:38 AM
Subject: Re: BGP support on ASA5585-X
On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 21:50 -0500, Tony Varriale wrote:
said:
>They could make it out of the box but thi
On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 21:50 -0500, Tony Varriale wrote:
> said:
> >They could make it out of the box but this is why Dylan made his statement.
>
> His statement is far fetched at best. Unless of course he's speaking of 100
> million line ACLs.
Can I just ask out of technical curiosity:
Q: Wh
- Original Message -
From:
To: "Greg Whynott"
Cc:
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 6:47 PM
Subject: Re: BGP support on ASA5585-X
They could make it out of the box but this is why Dylan made his statement.
His statement is far fetched at best. Unless of course he's
he ASA line is quite out of balance.
-Original Message-
From: "Greg Whynott"
Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 1:46pm
To: "Dylan Ebner"
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org"
Subject: Re: BGP support on ASA5585-X
i couldn't disagree with this statement more than I do.
the
- Original Message -
From: "Dylan Ebner"
To: "srg" ;
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 12:42 PM
Subject: RE: BGP support on ASA5585-X
IMHO, I don't think this is a marketing issue for cisco. It's a design
issue. PIX/ASA is good at some things, and b
The ASA, like the PIX does everything in software. More pps = higher
CPU. This is true of all non-crypto functions of the ASA. Crypto is
hardware accelerated.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Dylan Ebner wrote:
> IMHO, I don't think this is a marketing issue for cisco. It's a design issue.
> PIX/
i couldn't disagree with this statement more than I do.
they could make a box do it all if they wanted to, but it does not make
business sense.
On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:42 PM, Dylan Ebner wrote:
> IMHO, I don't think this is a marketing issue for cisco. It's a design issue.
> PIX/ASA is good a
IMHO, I don't think this is a marketing issue for cisco. It's a design issue.
PIX/ASA is good at some things, and bad at others. They have never been good as
routers. You have to remember, EIGRP didn't even come to the security line
until 8.0 code and they still do not support traffic shaping. T
Juniper srx runs JunOS.
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Jeffrey Lyon
wrote:
>
> Juniper Netscreen does, in case the OP is looking for alternatives.
>
> Best regards, Jeff
--
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.li...@gmail.com)
/security/asa/asa80/configuration/guide/glossary.html#wp1027964
>
> he security appliance does not support BGP.
>
> -Kevin
>
> -Original Message-
> From: "David DiGiacomo"
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:45pm
> To: "srg" , "nanog@nanog.org"
&
David DiGiacomo"
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:45pm
To: "srg" , "nanog@nanog.org"
Subject: RE: BGP support on ASA5585-X
I would seriously doubt it. Think of it from Cisco's point of view; If the ASA
ran BGP, you wouldn't need to buy a router.
probably going out on a limb here, but i suspect you'll never see BGP support
in any of Cisco's firewall products. In routers which have FW bits included,
yes, but not in an ASA product.
perhaps the marketing thinking is 'if you can afford an asa 558x, you can
afford one of our fine router
I would seriously doubt it. Think of it from Cisco's point of view; If the ASA
ran BGP, you wouldn't need to buy a router.
Dave Joel DiGiacomo "dav...@corp.nac.net"
Network Engineer / Peering Coordinator
Net Access Corp
Network Operations Center
973-590-5050
-Original M
14 matches
Mail list logo
