> From firewalls-owner @
GreatCircle .
COM Sat Nov 25 12:04 MET 1995
> Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 23:10:59 -0800
> X-Sender: janken @
rust .
net
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> To: Adam Horwitz <adam @
tripcom .
com>
> From: janken @
rust .
net (Ken Stephens (Millennium Consulting))
> Subject: Re: Firewalls review in Data Com
> Cc: firewalls @
GreatCircle .
COM
>
> I have been taken to task by Adam Horwitz <adam @
tripcom .
com> for my poor
> choice of words when I wrote:
>
> "Doesn't anyone care that you now can see that the Firewall-1 Product
> will pass a lot of packets (as check point has claimed) but, drops a lot of
> packets under heavy load as compared to the Cyberguard product that tops
> Firewall-1 at the traffic high end and dropped zero packets (Firewall Stress
> Test Chart vs. Lost Sessions table)."
>
Could you please give me the exact conditions of traffic you used to
(or your information source) compare Firewall-1 to Cyberguard and that
lead Firewall-1 to drop packets ? I would like to have confirm about
using THE SAME conditions (i.e. same hardware platform, hardware
interface, traffic etc..).
I subscribed this mailing list from a few days, so I'm sure I've lost a
few older messages :-). So could you help me to understand what you
call "Lost Sessions table" and "Firewall Stress Test Chart" ?
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Aldo Pannocchia phone: +39 (585) 790133
fax: +39 (585) 792552
NetiX S.r.l.
Viale Stazione, 78 e-mail: apannocchia @
netix .
it
54100 Massa MS - Italy
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
