Symantec's new Firewall Applaiance

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

Hi, I just evaluated Symantec's new Appliance the 300 series and it rocks!

It has multiple technology included and wireless. I insalled it at my new business.

Take a look at http://www.symantec.com/smallbiz/gtw/
5 answers Last reply
More about symantec firewall applaiance
  1. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    <emailiscool4u@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:14a143a3.0405240621.6701516b@posting.google.com...
    > Hi, I just evaluated Symantec's new Appliance the 300 series and it rocks!
    >
    > It has multiple technology included and wireless. I insalled it at my new
    business.
    >
    > Take a look at http://www.symantec.com/smallbiz/gtw/

    What's the 320 got that the D-Link DFL-300 doesn't for $100 cheaper and
    unlimited users vs. Symantec's 50 users (besides the Symantec name).
  2. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    On Tue, 25 May 2004 09:10:36 -0700, "admin too"
    <nguser2u@no.spam.AOL.com> wrote:

    >> Take a look at http://www.symantec.com/smallbiz/gtw/
    >
    >What's the 320 got that the D-Link DFL-300 doesn't for $100 cheaper and
    >unlimited users vs. Symantec's 50 users (besides the Symantec name).
    Call me cynical but with all the different network gear in different
    cases with apparently the same PCB in there it is getting a little
    weird.

    I had an SMC access point, got a Belkin access point, surprisingly
    they both have the same software. I understand it's about the same as
    the Linksys model which is surprisingly similar to the Dlink model,
    similar enough you can use one or the other firmware.

    Remember the way expensive Sonicwall, and the much cheaper Webramp,
    which were suspiciously similar?

    I wonder what the Symantec thing is same as?
  3. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    On Tue, 25 May 2004 09:10:36 -0700, admin too spoketh

    >
    ><emailiscool4u@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:14a143a3.0405240621.6701516b@posting.google.com...
    >> Hi, I just evaluated Symantec's new Appliance the 300 series and it rocks!
    >>
    >> It has multiple technology included and wireless. I insalled it at my new
    >business.
    >>
    >> Take a look at http://www.symantec.com/smallbiz/gtw/
    >
    >What's the 320 got that the D-Link DFL-300 doesn't for $100 cheaper and
    >unlimited users vs. Symantec's 50 users (besides the Symantec name).
    >

    The Symantec box is basically a "version 2" of their 100 and 200(R)
    models, which is the same as the Nexland boxes (Symantec bought out
    Nexland).

    Although I cannot state with absolute certainty, the Symantec boxes
    doesn't have a user limit. It's a "recommended" limit based on the CPU
    in the box.

    Other than that, it seems like the D-Link box as at least one advantage
    in that it has an actual DMZ port (interface), while the Symantec box
    uses the same old "define one LAN IP as DMZ" that is so wrong... It also
    looks like the D-Link box has better access control features for tighter
    control of traffic between the three interfaces...

    Lars M. Hansen
    www.hansenonline.net
    Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
    "If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"
  4. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    I have a D-Link DFL-300 Firewall/VPN router but I wouldn't recommend
    it. I'm not to savy with networking but know enough to get by so I
    could not be using it correctly or to it's maximum. But my issue is
    that the DFL-300 has a hard time renewing IP address when ever the ISP
    changes IP address on the DSL/Cable modem. I have to manually renew
    it myself most of the time. Though sometimes I'm lucky and the DFL
    will renew it automatically but that's like once very 10 times I
    manually renew it. Then again I've also heard that the DFL has a hard
    time working with BellSouth FastAccess DSL because of the Westel
    modems they use. Another issue is that the DFL-300 doesn't work when
    you are trying to connect to from another NAT. You have to have a
    public IP address for it work correctly. So bascially you'll have to
    get a direct connection to the internet to be able to VPN into the
    DFL. I've tried using the Windows XP VPN setup D-Link says to do but
    they failed to mention that you have to be connected directly to the
    internet and not behind some kind of NAT or other firewall unless the
    firewall has VPN capabilities also. If somebody knows something I
    don't please share it. My e-mail is bob.lee@apcsolution.com any help
    would be greatful. Until I find out something diffrent I'm stuck on
    how horrible the DFL works, and yes I've got the latest firmware and
    it has not helped out much. So over all if I could have the choice
    again on getting the DFL-300 or a more popular brand like SonicWall or
    NetScreen I would go with the more popular and pay more with out the
    headache with the DFL-300. Even the D-Link tech support didn't want
    to help me because they said they are only aware of a direct
    connection when it comes to VPN unless you use another DFL to connect
    to another DFL. Just my opinions here. Thanks.

    Bob
    Lars M. Hansen <badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote in message news:<net6b0t2niukfpvp5pprib0sgiv7t1m9iv@4ax.com>...
    > On Tue, 25 May 2004 09:10:36 -0700, admin too spoketh
    >
    > >
    > ><emailiscool4u@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > >news:14a143a3.0405240621.6701516b@posting.google.com...
    > >> Hi, I just evaluated Symantec's new Appliance the 300 series and it rocks!
    > >>
    > >> It has multiple technology included and wireless. I insalled it at my new
    > business.
    > >>
    > >> Take a look at http://www.symantec.com/smallbiz/gtw/
    > >
    > >What's the 320 got that the D-Link DFL-300 doesn't for $100 cheaper and
    > >unlimited users vs. Symantec's 50 users (besides the Symantec name).
    > >
    >
    > The Symantec box is basically a "version 2" of their 100 and 200(R)
    > models, which is the same as the Nexland boxes (Symantec bought out
    > Nexland).
    >
    > Although I cannot state with absolute certainty, the Symantec boxes
    > doesn't have a user limit. It's a "recommended" limit based on the CPU
    > in the box.
    >
    > Other than that, it seems like the D-Link box as at least one advantage
    > in that it has an actual DMZ port (interface), while the Symantec box
    > uses the same old "define one LAN IP as DMZ" that is so wrong... It also
    > looks like the D-Link box has better access control features for tighter
    > control of traffic between the three interfaces...
    >
    > Lars M. Hansen
    > www.hansenonline.net
    > Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
    > "If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"
  5. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    On 3 Jun 2004 18:31:01 -0700, Bob S. Lee spoketh

    >I have a D-Link DFL-300 Firewall/VPN router but I wouldn't recommend
    >it. I'm not to savy with networking but know enough to get by so I
    >could not be using it correctly or to it's maximum. But my issue is
    >that the DFL-300 has a hard time renewing IP address when ever the ISP
    >changes IP address on the DSL/Cable modem.

    My comments with regards to the D-Link and Symantec box should not be
    considered to be anything else than a comparison of features, and in no
    way a recommendation one way or the other.

    Lars M. Hansen
    www.hansenonline.net
    Remove "bad" from my e-mail address to contact me.
    "If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?"
Ask a new question

Read More

Firewalls Symantec Security Networking