[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "Kristian Shaw" <monowall at wealdclose dot co dot uk>
 To:  <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] m0n0wall vs Watchguard
 Date:  Wed, 12 Oct 2005 00:47:29 +0100
Hello,

Do you know if the Watchguards are performing application layer filtering as 
well?

Windows 2003 with SP1 uses a slightly different format of RPC that some 
firewalls will drop:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/899148

Regards,

Kris.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Aaron Freeman" <aaronpc at pccreations dot net>
To: <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 12:09 AM
Subject: [m0n0wall] m0n0wall vs Watchguard


A friend of mine has a bundled T1 and he has replication issue botween two 
Windows 2003 servers. The sites have the following firewalls, one running 
FireBox 1000 the other running a soho6. Both Watchguard.

When I do a speedtest behind the Watchguard the speeds are consistantly 
1.8MB/1.8MB.

When I put both location behind a m0n0wall running on a Dell OptiPlex GX150 
my average speed is 2.8 MB/2.8MB with no replication issues.

I have spoken to both Watchguard and Microsoft and the each point the finger 
at each other.

I have proven that the Watchguard is the problem. How do I prove to my 
friend that m0n0wall is a valid business solution? Or am I incorrect in my 
thinking?

Thank you for any input possible.

Aaron