Re: Palo Alto

[Michael Horne <Michael.Horne () OLIN EDU>]

We just purchased a pair of PA-5020's in active-passive mode and are overall very pleased with them.
We replaced a pair of Alteon 5114 checkpoint FW that were extremely tired.
Support has been great when needed.


Michael Horne
Network Engineer
Franklin W Olin College of Engineering
781-292-2438


From: The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU] On Behalf Of Darnell 
Walker
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 3:34 PM
To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
Subject: Re: [SECURITY] Palo Alto

We are in the process of purchasing the PA-5060's, but wanted to know about  the support overall and is it 3rd party?


-darnell


From: The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU] On Behalf Of JR 
Ramirez
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 10:30 AM
To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
Subject: Re: [SECURITY] Palo Alto

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<mailto: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


________________________________

UT Southwestern Medical Center
The future of medicine, today.