Re: Palo Alto

[JR Ramirez <jrramirez30 () GMAIL COM>]

At my former employer we implemented PA-4060 in stand-alone mode after
problems attempting to enable active-active on the 4.x code.  I highly
suggest staying with the 3.1.x code.

We have had issues with the box rebooting itself since we implemented it
early this year.  We like the web content filtering functionality, however
we were not pleased with the initial instability.  Before I left the plan
was to replace the Checkpoint implementation with PA to enable next
generation firewall capabilities and address Web 2.0 visibility.

So to answer your question, I still like PA but make sure your are running a
stable version of code.


On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Kellogg, Brian D. <bkellogg () sbu edu> wrote:

> Looking for real world experiences on the stability and support services of
> the Palo Alto Firewalls if anyone is willing to share.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks,****
>
> Brian****