SonicWall devices
-
In my last place of employment I discovered Untangled. Since I had a unmanaged PIX, I figured that it wouldn't hurt to install it... and it didn't hurt at all.
The UT box ran until I left with no real issues, and found or blocked hundreds of issues. I am pretty happy with the UT software.
Fast forward until today - I have several Sonicwall devices in my local and remote locations.. Half of which I don't have a password to. And of course support isn't exactly helpful. Nor is my predecessor..
Trying to isolate a Port scan issue that was getting us blocked I adjusted a rule only to cause a full site issue of not being able to access the internet... Fun!
Then I found a server issue, Uhm.. Okay how much can I do at once.
I had started a UT build on a old PE 310 and once I ported a few updates, swapped it. Back online it was back to the server. (see other thread)
But now I have what it seems extremely slow bandwidth. I did a speed test (office is on Time Warner Cable) and my home network is faster (2.8mbs to 2.5mbs)
I know more about Untanlged than I do the Sonicwalls.. And I really want to replace them all. I do have one Ubiquity Lite Router for another site,.. but I am having some issue with getting it setup.
Are Sonicwalls that 'great'?
Are Speedtest sites really telling a 'decent' story of your ISPs line?
-
Sonicwalls are not really generally considered to be great, just well marketed. Lower end devices popular with people looking to bundle them with server sales. They sell based on the name. Not considered bad, but not considered good.
-
Speedtest.net generally does a pretty good job reporting on your line. Nothing can ever be the whole story, networking is too complex for that. But it gives a good, useful picture.
-
Honestly I don't know why more SMBs don't consider Pfsense. They rule it out as "home grade" or something. But it's cheap (free aside from hardware) and P4 or core, or iseries will run it with ease. I've ran them very successfully with many VPNs (10gb throughput) and it has great firewall, vlan and limiting settings. even scheudling on the limiting so you can open it up for nightly updates to run full speed when no one is on the network.
Sonic wall is something I'd stay away from. Ubiquiti has good stuff. Cisco does as well, but IMO cisco is becoming less and less attractive in the market as others come up with better priced/feature units than cisco offers.
-
MRTG on your side + on the ISP side will give you a good picture of what does on,
-
pfSense is pretty good. Much better than many expensive options.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Sonic wall is something I'd stay away from. Ubiquiti has good stuff. Cisco does as well, but IMO cisco is becoming less and less attractive in the market as others come up with better priced/feature units than cisco offers.
I have to agree with this. Cisco has really lost their edge.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Honestly I don't know why more SMBs don't consider Pfsense. They rule it out as "home grade" or something. But it's cheap (free aside from hardware) and P4 or core, or iseries will run it with ease. I've ran them very successfully with many VPNs (10gb throughput) and it has great firewall, vlan and limiting settings. even scheudling on the limiting so you can open it up for nightly updates to run full speed when no one is on the network.
Sonic wall is something I'd stay away from. Ubiquiti has good stuff. Cisco does as well, but IMO cisco is becoming less and less attractive in the market as others come up with better priced/feature units than cisco offers.
The only reason I do not run pfSense is because I want a small simple hardware device, and Ubiquiti fits that for me. Prior to finding the Ubiquiti EdgeRouters, I was using pfSense on old hardware. Prior to that I was using ClearOS.
-
Very true. pfSense only makes sense if you have existing hardware to reuse.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
MRTG on your side + on the ISP side will give you a good picture of what does on,
Sorry .. What? What is MRTG -...
-
@Reid-Cooper said:
Very true. pfSense only makes sense if you have existing hardware to reuse.
@JaredBusch said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Honestly I don't know why more SMBs don't consider Pfsense. They rule it out as "home grade" or something. But it's cheap (free aside from hardware) and P4 or core, or iseries will run it with ease. I've ran them very successfully with many VPNs (10gb throughput) and it has great firewall, vlan and limiting settings. even scheudling on the limiting so you can open it up for nightly updates to run full speed when no one is on the network.
Sonic wall is something I'd stay away from. Ubiquiti has good stuff. Cisco does as well, but IMO cisco is becoming less and less attractive in the market as others come up with better priced/feature units than cisco offers.
The only reason I do not run pfSense is because I want a small simple hardware device, and Ubiquiti fits that for me. Prior to finding the Ubiquiti EdgeRouters, I was using pfSense on old hardware. Prior to that I was using ClearOS.
I have a Ubquiti Lite router for one site,.. just haven't had much luck with decypher it yet.. Of course when you have one crisis after another (Yes, I do know it's the IT world... it's a daily thing) I need some decompression time.
I like Untangle for the same basic reasons it would appear that pfSense is out,.. Open Source and free....
As for size,.. shame the Raspberry Pi isn't 'big enough' to run as a FW with either..
-
@g.jacobse why is open source out? support can be purchased for both solutions you mention.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@g.jacobse why is open source out? support can be purchased for both solutions you mention.
Hmm,... 'out' is the incorrect word.. I'd rather go OpenSource as opposed to the Big Box software/hardware...
-
@g.jacobse Raspberry Pi is big enough to run as a router.
-
@g.jacobse Ubiquiti Edge RouterLite is open source too.
-
Untangle, pfSense, Ubiquiti...all good, low cost choices.
