@scottalanmiller said in ISP Failover with Cisco ASA: That's mostly true. But Cisco considers it real Cisco and it shows their view of themselves. And that, I always think, is important. Cisco doesn't seem themselves as an enterprise player. And I've been in sales meetings with Cisco and that definitely comes through when talking to them. That's not what I got from my sales conversations with them. They were very explicit about real Cisco and the lesser sub-brands. Having been at two huge banks that were burned by being willing to use UCS, Cisco and enterprise are two words I never put together. From networking to phones to servers, Cisco is consistently overpriced and underperforming. I absolutely loved UCS, even wrote the original oVirt/RHV plugin for the VMFEX cards. They were ahead of their time with those boxes, but the cloud pretty much killed everything really cool and advanced about HW

@pmoncho said in Kerio Connect "license error: license exhausted, cannot allow another host": Based on the couple posts I have seen, each registered user can have five devices. So, if they have 30 devices, they need 6 user licenses. Did they add any extra devices lately? Easily, but more likely they just let their license expire.

@Donahue said in Why I See UTMs As Generally Bad in the Current Market: @scottalanmiller said in Why I See UTMs As Generally Bad in the Current Market: @Donahue said in Why I See UTMs As Generally Bad in the Current Market: The reason we went with Fortigate over an Edge router, is that the Edge router couldn't do the IPsec bandwidth we were trying to hit. But mine is an NGFW with UTM bundled in. Could there been some other product that I dont know of that would have been better in our case? ERL does nearly half of what you need... https://community.ubnt.com/t5/EdgeRouter/ERL-Performance-Testing-with-IPSec-VPN/m-p/1053799#M44593 ER and ERPro are so much more powerful. The ER Pro has 2x the CPU power, and 4x the RAM. We'd expect it to be able to saturate your lines no problem. Of course that is "expect", but based on the ERL speeds, and that they run the same code, there is little doubt that it can push IPSec over 1Gig speeds. https://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/edgemax/EdgeRouter_DS.pdf Your link is what convinced me not to use the ER pro. the Pro's will only do <500 mbps at full capacity, its in the link you posted. Where in it? Oh, I see. he mentions ER Pro in another post, then posts them without stating what they are in a thread on ERLs. VERY confusing.

Something to keep in mind is NGFW. Ubiquiti and Meraki, for example, are NGFW. It looks like much of the market is already starting to cool on the UTM crazy and NGFW is taking off as the "next stage" of popular approaches. Basically a reversal of direction or marketing at least, even from the big players in the UTM space like Palo Alto, Fortinet, Cisco, etc.

@gjacobse said in Security while Traveling -: Could something like this or similar be supplemental? Seems pretty silly. So here is the question.... What threat do you perceive there being? How do you feel this device addresses that thread? I don't really see any threat in the first place, and so that makes it extra hard to know how to assuage your fears. But how this device is supposed to help, I'm really unsure.

@jaredbusch said in Ubiquiti ER3 to ER4 Upgrade?: @scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti ER3 to ER4 Upgrade?: @mroth911 said in ubiquiti Er3 to 4 Upgrade?: Can I just back up my er3 and upload it to the 4 I believe so. I have never tried, but it should handle it because it only bring the /config folder in, and nothing in the hardware of the 3 vs 4 is all that different. To clarify, I have migrated from ERL to ER4 a couple times. But I manually migrate. I don’t try to restore the old config.

@dbeato said in Anyone running SonicOS 6.5.0.2-8n?: @dave247 said in Anyone running SonicOS 6.5.0.2-8n?: We run a SonicWall NSA 3600 where I work and I am staring to look into upgrading to the new 6.5 firmware (6.5.0.2-8n). I have heard of some issues with the last two updates, and wanted to get more input if anyone has any to give.. I am not, I am using the 6.2.9 on the production Sonicwalls we have. I would recommend to test it out if possible. Unfortunately I can't realistically test it out. Even if I had an extra, non-production unit, I doubt I could effectively detect issues since production factors would not be present enough to fully test. I suppose I could just always roll back if necessary... but I think I will probably be waiting a few more releases.. that or just move to a different UTM all together..

@scottalanmiller said in FreePBX 14 Firewall Start Warning: @jaredbusch said in FreePBX 14 Firewall Start Warning: @scottalanmiller said in FreePBX 14 Firewall Start Warning: Well, we are one step newer, so that might be it. # fwconsole ma list | grep firewall | firewall | 13.0.46.1 | Enabled | AGPLv3+ | I do not know the CLI command to revert, but it is simple to do in the GUI. CLick "Check upgrades and then expand the Firewall and you will have a previous versions option. Tested and you are right, rolling back to 45.5 and the message goes away. You could upgrade to edge and see if it is different, but I would just wait for the next update.

ERL with an AC Lite AP at home as well as many clients. Zero issues.

@dashrender you could see opensips as a software version of this, but in high load scenarios or in transcoding the example @scottalanmiller gives about restricted instruction sets on the video chip is a great example. If Asterisk was created after SIP standards were made it probably would have some type of domain filtering that would make the mobile issue a very easy fix. That being said the responsive firewall was a huge leap forward, but i don’t see anything in their big requests that indicates they are going to go further. I’ve not tried to use the Sangoma SBC or to fix the issue since I’ve moved on. I’m guessing the domain for mobile access is very low amongst FreePBX users, or maybe it’s used on desktops inside a LAN that is not using the responsive firewall.

All the time. I only know this from having to log in every time the firewall gets behind and blocks the remote phones using responsive firewall. I do think FreePBX is great, don't get me wrong. These are some the reasons I still prefer a freeswitch based deployment and enforcing domains as part of authentication. Almost all attempts to brute force authenticate are dropped simply because they don't know the domain (realm) being used and they quickly give up. There is a lot more that I like over FreePBX in my current setup but that has more to do with trying to be a service provider. For a single installation my only gripe is the way the firewall works, how do people use Bria and roam around. That being said they could close that gap at any moment and my only complaint would be the delicacy of updating systems or uploading the wrong format of an audio file. Which apparently only bigbear has ever had problems with. Lol.

The resellers used to do it manually and charged $1 a phone, which is why I think adoption stalled. Plus documentation is horrible. Once you are in the portal its pretty obvious what can be done. I have linked my GUI so that when you add a phone's mac address to my service it uses Yealink API to automatically configured RPS.

@jaredbusch - I thought that is what you meant but did a double-take. LOL

Additionally, I'm looking at the firewall settings Is this expected? I get the list of my trusted items, it shows an empty list for other, but local, internet, and rejected all provide zero feedback. I have the Let's Encrypt sites added to local on the same page as I have my trusted sites added, yet they don't show up as seen above. Thoughts? This makes me think that I have somehow disabled the local zone

Before you can get in to what OS to run the clients on, do you have to ask what apps the business needs to run? If they need some kind of CAD package and it's only offered on Windows, the linux client goes out the window. (pun intended)

@jaredbusch said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost: @nashbrydges said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost: @jaredbusch said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost: @nashbrydges said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost: @brandon220 said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost: I've been using an ERL at home for a while and have them deployed at several business. Zero complaints and I recommend them all the time. I wish I could use it at home. I'm on Bell Canada ftth and they use a different vlan for iptv and internet. All of the online guides I've seen haven't been able to get me to use my ERL and Bell won't give up which VLANs they use. No one hasd figured this information out yet? Sadly not yet, at least not that my Google-fu has allowed me to find. I am a bit amazed because it should only take a mirrored switch port and wireshark to find VLAN tags. This was my thinking as I was reading the posts. This is /should be pretty easy to figure out.

@whoolly said in Switchvox phone issues: Vendor insisted he has never had any VOIP issues with Sonicwall and didn't want to budge on that. Even while it doesn't work. So you know that he'll say this to other customers now, even after this one. Chances are, he's had problems at all customers. SonicWall is culprit #1 for VoIP issues. I mean that literally. I get a call that someone has VoIP audio issues, my first question is always "Do you have a SonicWall?" Nine times out of ten, the answer is yes and nine times out of those ten, the SW was the issue. It's nearly a sure bet with audio issues. Had you led this question purely with "I have these audio issues..." we'd have said "I bet you have a SonicWall."

Just wanted to add @bj to this thread that I think a $100-ish Cloud Router from Mikrotik would blow most hardware away, including Ubiquiti, on pure performance. With the $50 and under models you are still getting 1 million PPS. The new cloud router series really has a crazy amount of power. This still coming from a pure PPS (packets per second) point of view. I think the cheapest cloud router has 12 to 16 cores That would only count for the core routers I am more familiar with (12 to 24 now) in the $500 range. Very poor marketing in the states but very popular with western country WISPS.

@Dashrender said in Cross Post - Help sorting out a Firewall Issue on a Debian Box: A default gateway on the debian box? My thought. I don't think I've seen a system firewall not accept icmp by default. If you stop iptables and still can't ping it's not the firewall.

Factory Reset, Setup, Disable Hardware Checksum Offloading, Works Prefect.

Oops.

@aaronstuder said in Vultr Adds a Free Firewall Service: Is it just me, or is Vultr killing it recently? Are they? With Linode's improved pricing, Vultr still is trailing for us in most use cases. It's a bit too costly and a bit too slow. We just get way more bang for the buck with Linode and Linode has load balancers which I think are a bit more important than firewalls. Vultr is doing well, but killing it seems a bit far as we are migrating off in several cases because it just isn't the best value compared to it's more mature competitor any longer. It's definitely doing better than Digital Ocean these days, though.

@Reid-Cooper said in Fortinet Experiences: I guess it matters then... who else is on the list? What about Sophos, are they an option? Looks like only their disk encryption is. Here is the list: http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/STM/cmvp/documents/140-1/1401vend.htm.

@Reid-Cooper said in Open source Firewall: pfSense was really good in the past. But I agree, the days of building your own firewall on an old PC that you have are over. Right - the cost just isn't worth running your old PC. Power alone will cost more than the cost of an ER-X or ER-L.

The last step there, "Networks" is still functionally the same, but the GUI has been updated.

@scottalanmiller said in Barracuda Borks Firewalls with Automatic Update: @Dashrender said in Barracuda Borks Firewalls with Automatic Update: ERL for crying out loud! Keep one on spare for just these kinds of emergencies! lol I was thinking the same - most can probably afford to just keep this on the shelf in case of an issue.

By default, traffic will pass between VLANs 1 & 2, unless you go into the firewall & add rules to deny traffic

@stacksofplates said in Open Firewall Ports on CentOS 7 and RHEL 7: @coliver said in Open Firewall Ports on CentOS 7 and RHEL 7: @stacksofplates said in Open Firewall Ports on CentOS 7 and RHEL 7: @coliver said in Open Firewall Ports on CentOS 7 and RHEL 7: @scottalanmiller said in Open Firewall Ports on CentOS 7 and RHEL 7: @coliver said in Open Firewall Ports on CentOS 7 and RHEL 7: Did anyone ever figure out if there was a way to setup files for firewalld? Or was the XML service files the way to go? XML I think. That's what I was afraid of. We're using IPTables on all of our OEL7 servers right now but I think moving to the default firewalld may be a good idea. I'll have to look into the XML config and see how much more difficult, if at all, it is over the IPTables file. It's a shame we can't just copy a single file around anymore but the XML files probably won't be too much more difficult. Ya it's not bad at all. Here's the config from my Identity Management server. It's pretty similar to /etc/sysconfig/system-config-firewall on RHEL 6, just in zone specific XML files. <zone> <short>Public</short> <description>For use in public areas. You do not trust the other computers on networks to not harm your computer. Only selected incoming connections are accepted.</description> <service name="http"/> <service name="https"/> <service name="ntp"/> <service name="dhcpv6-client"/> <service name="kerberos"/> <service name="ldaps"/> <service name="ssh"/> <service name="dns"/> <service name="ldap"/> </zone> Those services are predefined right? You can also build your own services via the same process. Ya and you can define specific ports. I prob could have grabbed a better example. No, I think I've got it just need to investigate actually setting these up.

@RobLewisss said in Linux Iptables Firewall Automation: @JulianJulian Thanks mate! I just downloaded the agent. I'll let you guys know how it works. I also downloaded the agent to one of my Linux systems. It was very quick and simple. The cloud interface picked up the installed agent imediately and I was able to manage it right there. There are different groups that you can place each agent for different rules. Definitely worth testing. Up to 5 servers for free!