GroupStudy.com GroupStudy.com - A virtual community of network engineers
 Home  BookStore  StudyNotes  Links  Archives  StudyRooms  HelpWanted  Discounts  Login
Re: OT - Dynamic Routing on a Firewall? posted 09/08/2008
[Chronological Index] [Thread Index] [Top] [Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Shahid,

The virtualiztion support in Juniper is far more better then Cisco ASA.
Cisco Highest model support maximum of 50 contexts where Juniper supports
500

Following Juniper firewalls support virtulization (Virtual Firewalls)

1- ISG 1000
2-ISG-2000
3-Netscreen 500 (EOS now)
4-Netscreen 5200
5-Netscreen 5400

in terms of features and other things the virtual firewall of Juniper is
better then Contexts of Cisco.

But hey I should favour Cisco as I am Cisco Certified : )

HTH


2008/9/7 Wes Stevens <wrsteve33-gsccie@xxxxxxxxx>

> The quantumflow processors in the new asr are cabilble of doing firewall
> functions (and a lot more) in hardware. The ASR will fuction as a firewall
> with 4.5gbps of throughput. This chip reminds me of the early days of IBM
> and the power pc chip. It was basically a mainframe on a chip. It started in
> the pc and AS400 lines and eventually expanded to run everything.
>
> This chip will probably do the same in cisco. It will be the basis of the
> switch processor engine from the ISR all the way up to the CSR.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Scott Morris <smorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Shahid Ansari <shahid1357@xxxxxxxxx>; Muhammad Nasim <
> muhammad.nasim@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: CCIEin2006 <ciscocciein2006@xxxxxxxxx>; Cisco certification <
> ccielab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, September 7, 2008 9:01:43 AM
> Subject: RE: OT - Dynamic Routing on a Firewall?
>
> Kinda hard to virtualize an ASIC-driven operation....
>
> AFAIK, no.  Not for the Netscreen firewalls.
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Shahid Ansari
> Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 4:36 AM
> To: Muhammad Nasim
> Cc: CCIEin2006; Cisco certification
> Subject: Re: OT - Dynamic Routing on a Firewall?
>
> Cisco made ASA for pure firewalling,IPS and content security technologies
> with Multiple vulnerabilities. : )
>
> Can We do Virtualization for Juniper`s Firewall ? : )  ;)
>
> Thanks
> Shahid
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Muhammad Nasim
> <muhammad.nasim@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
> > BGP is not supported on ASA until now.
> >
> > Juniper supports it.
> >
> > Now a days memory is not an issue in firewalls. Rams are in GB now  a
> days.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2008/9/7 Shahid Ansari <shahid1357@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >
> >> If you are receiving default route in BGP no problem let firewall to
> >> do two functionality(Routing and Firewalling)
> >>  but if you are receiving full BGP table then keep enough memory to
> >> support routing and Firewalling .
> >>
> >> May be Juniper has some higher end products which can supports both
> >> Routing and Firewall in large networks.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Shahid
> >>
> >>  On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 5:10 AM, Muhammad Nasim <
> >> muhammad.nasim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't think so that one should avoid running routing protocol due
> >>> to the fear of BUGS and other things. If we think like that trust me
> >>> then we will not be able to run most of the feature set of firewall.
> >>>
> >>> For example ASA support S2S, Remote Access and SSL VPNs so I should
> >>> avoid to run two or more type of VPNs together ? The answer is
> >>> simple NO. Yes some error or bug  occur I will try to solve it or
> >>> workaround it other wise calling TAC is the last step.
> >>>
> >>> I don't think so firewall becomes more vulnerable by running routing
> >>> protocol. if we think like that then we will be also avoiding
> >>> running VPN and CBAC (application firewall) on the routers and also
> >>> then we will also be avoiding running CME on the Routers as well.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So no need to worries : )
> >>>
> >>> HTH
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2008/9/7 CCIEin2006 <ciscocciein2006@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>> > Thanks for the reply Muhammad.
> >>> >
> >>> > From a security perspective, do you think running routing
> >>> > protocols on
> >>> a
> >>> > firewall makes the firewall more vulnerable? If so how?
> >>> >
> >>> > I am thinking that extra processes running on the firewall leads
> >>> > to
> >>> more
> >>> > bugs and more likelyhood of exploitation. What do you think?
> >>> >
> >>> > No one else wants to chime in here?
> >>> >
> >>> > On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Muhammad Nasim <
> >>> muhammad.nasim@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Ok lets have a debate on it.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> It depends what exactly the design you have on your network. For
> >>> example
> >>> >> standard is to have router for ROUTING and Firewall for
> >>> >> firewalling
> >>> and IPS
> >>> >> and other things.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Now if u already have router and firewall in place then it is
> >>> >> good to
> >>> keep
> >>> >> the routing on the routers BUT if u really want to save money
> >>> >> then
> >>> just
> >>> >> purchase firewall which supports good routing and again Juniper
> >>> >> takes
> >>> the
> >>> >> edge.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Juniper SSG series have very strong support of routing not only
> >>> >> that
> >>> it
> >>> >> also supports WAN , DSL and other interfaces so in short u can
> >>> >> only
> >>> buy SSG
> >>> >> and do routing and firewalling not only that from version 6.1.0
> >>> juniper
> >>> >> firewall support DMVPN as well which unfortunaly cisco is lacking
> >>> behind.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> There is no hard and fast rule for it. It really depends on your
> >>> scenario
> >>> >>
> >>> >> For example if I am going to desing network for 10 branches now I
> >>> >> will first look into the budget of the my customer if it permits
> >>> >> I will
> >>> surley go
> >>> >> for one router and one firewall.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> if it budget does not permit I will go for firewall which
> >>> >> supports
> >>> good
> >>> >> routing as well.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Hope this helps
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 2008/9/6 CCIEin2006 <ciscocciein2006@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>>  No brave ones want to tackle this one?
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 10:09 AM, CCIEin2006 <
> >>> ciscocciein2006@xxxxxxxxx
> >>> >>> >wrote:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >  Hiya folks,
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > I was wondering if the group could share some pro/cons of
> >>> >>> > running
> >>> >>> dynamic
> >>> >>> > routing protocols on a firewall?
> >>> >>> > Can anyone share their experience with this?
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > I have a few branch offices connected to HQ in a hub and spoke
> >>> fashion
> >>> >>> via
> >>> >>> > metro ethernet links. I am looking to add VPN as a backup
> >>> >>> > (each
> >>> branch
> >>> >>> has
> >>> >>> > local internet access). The routers are currently runnign OSPF.
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > I am thinking of doing it all on the ASA platform to save
> >>> >>> > money,
> >>> but
> >>> >>> > something in my gut tells me to leave the routing up to
> >>> >>> > routers. So
> >>> I
> >>> >>> am
> >>> >>> > thinking I might need to bite the bullet and buy some routers
> too.
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > What do you think?
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> ____________________________________________________________________
> >>> ___
> >>> >>> Subscription information may be found at:
> >>> >>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> Muhammad Nasim
> >>> >> Network Engineer
> >>> >> Saudi Arabia
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>  Muhammad Nasim
> >>> Network Engineer
> >>> Saudi Arabia
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >>>
> >>> ____________________________________________________________________
> >>> ___ Subscription information may be found at:
> >>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Shahid
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Muhammad Nasim
> > Network Engineer
> > Saudi Arabia
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Shahid
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Muhammad Nasim
Network Engineer
Saudi Arabia