Re: PIX 7.2 Vs m0n0wall
"Jimmy Bones (Mhottie)" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.firewalls.m0n0wall |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> As with any two different solutions you're comparing, the PIX can do some things m0n0wall can't, and the reverse is true as well. Right, I am thinking we should/could provide a more comprehensive comparison between the two directly. PIX OS 7 added a lot of new functions to the PIX. -J On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Chris Buechler <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Jimmy Bones (Mhottie) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey Manuel and Guys, > > > > Been using m0n0 for a long time now and happy to see 1.31 out. > > > > This has been asked many times in the past (last reference I could find > was > > in 2006) and I think we should re-visit the topic briefly. > > > > PIX Vs m0n0wall - > > > > You can get PIX OS 7.2 on the 506e hardware easily. This is a Pentium III > > 300 (600 in my case) and 256mb Ram (upgradeable comes with 32mb). > > > > Using 7.2 as a reference point and m0n0 1.31 - can we can get a good > > compare/contrast/performance going for this? > > > > Things really haven't changed since it was last discussed. As with any > two different solutions you're comparing, the PIX can do some things > m0n0wall can't, and the reverse is true as well. It depends on what > you specifically need in your network as to which is a better fit, or > whether either would suffice. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >