Re: Firewalls
- From: "Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]" <kweilbacMVP@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:00:35 -0500
First, it sounds like the "other vendor" is trying to push hardware sales (a
new h/w firewall, separate vpn and exchange server)? What are the numbers
for this "future growth" they are talking about?
1. A hardware firewall on an SBS2003 Std server is a no-brainer "yes", in my
opinion. The decision then is Cisco or something else. You're paying extra
$$$ for the Cisco name. Several have been using the Sonicwall TZ150/TZI70
successfully with SBS. I'm testing a low end DLink DFL-200 at a site.
2. Why are they pushing a VPN authentication server? Are they trying to make
an argument that a hardware firewall + VPN will make your customer more
secure? If so, I would say that a firewall (Cisco or otherwise) does not, on
its own, make you more secure. Furthermore, using VPN can in fact make you
*more* insecure. Read more here:
http://forums.msrportal.com/archive/index.php?t-2625.html
If you want to provide strong two-factor remote authentication with SBS,
take a look at Dana Epps solution at Scorpoin Software:
http://www.scorpionsoft.com/
3. Exchange on a separate server for 15 users? Did anyone tell the other
vendor that SBS supports up to 75 users on Exchange in SBS? Did anyone tell
them that the Microsot SBS support team, which totals almost 75 users, run
and use SBS and Exchange in this exact environment? Did you know that if the
need ever came tohave a separate Exchange server, that SBSR2 provides the
umbrella coverage for a 2nd Exchange server with no cost of additional cals?
Again, it sounds to me they are trying to sell FUD (fear, uncertainty and
doubt) to your client in order to sell more hardware.
Just my opinion.
--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"
"Tom" <schweg@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%VOAh.6002$MN.3810@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I have a client who has had another vendor recommend they purchase a cisco
router/firewall for their SBS 2003 standard installation. The client uses
DSL. The other vendor feels there should also be a separate VPN
authentication server and perhaps move the Exchange to a spearate server,
all to acommodate future growth. This installation has 15 users. I am
curious to know what anyone would think about the Cisco purchase; if
Standard is safe enough (it seems to be for all my other clients on the
Standard version of SBS 2003) and if moving them to Premium would be a
reasonable alternative to the Cisco hardware purchase? If they did go the
Cisco route, I may suggest they just go to a T1 line with would probably
include the Cisco hardware. for the record, the suggestions (i.e moving
Exchange to another server) seem to moss the point of SBS in the first
place, but I don't want to get into a battle with the other people.
Thanks for any comments,
Tom
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Firewalls
- From: Tom
- Re: Firewalls
- References:
- Firewalls
- From: Tom
- Firewalls
- Prev by Date: Re: Backup Exchange Servers
- Next by Date: Exchange setup
- Previous by thread: Firewalls
- Next by thread: Re: Firewalls
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
