Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control
From: David Lang <david.lang () digitalinsight com>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 13:25:28 -0800 (PST)
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Dale W. Carder wrote:
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 14:22:40 -0600 From: Dale W. Carder <dwcarder () doit wisc edu> To: Shimon Silberschlag <shimons () bll co il> Cc: firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com, David Lang <david.lang () digitalinsight com> Subject: Re: [fw-wiz] Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control On Feb 29, 2004, at 8:48 AM, Shimon Silberschlag wrote:When designing a new internet architecture, we are debating the use of either a physical switch per segment, as was traditionally recommended by the majority of readers on this list, and using a big switch combined with an on-switch FW that controls traffic down to a port granularity (e.g. the Cisco FWSM enclosed in the 6500 switch).I personally believe that the idea of separating vlans onto separate switches is fueled by paranoia and inferior switch architectures. Separating vlans onto their own switches does not scale. If it does for your environment, I envy you :-) There are economies of scale in having bigger switches with more vlans, and trunking between them. The 6500 series switches and competing products are marketed towards that idea.
I agree that this is the marketing claim. the definition of what 'scales' varies depending on what you are trying to do.
What would be the current group recommendations WRT to such a setup, taking into account that the usual "don't trust VLANS to separate your segments" is mitigated by using the FWSM to enforce the separation policy?The switch enforces the separation policy between vlans. The FWSM is a firewall between vlans.
this is my point, adding the FWSM doesn't enforce any ADDITIONAL protection that you wouldn't have if you just used the switch with it's VLANs. the claim I was responding to was that becouse the FWSM was installed in the swtich it somehow made the switch inherently safe and eliminated all the traditional issues that have risen from switch configuration. David Lang -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan _______________________________________________ firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Current thread:
- Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control David Lang (Mar 01)
- Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control Shimon Silberschlag (Mar 01)
- Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control Krzysztof Gajdemski (Mar 02)
- Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control Krzysztof Gajdemski (Mar 02)
- Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control Dale W. Carder (Mar 04)
- Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control David Lang (Mar 04)
- Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control Shimon Silberschlag (Mar 04)
- Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control Krzysztof Gajdemski (Mar 02)
- Re: Multiple small switches vs. a single big one; Granularity of control Shimon Silberschlag (Mar 01)
