x
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
H-Burger 12/4/2012 | 10:16:12 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test interesting that in the same poll as to why vendor's don't show up that 16% of people suspected that Vendor doesn't have a product ready for comercial use and 21% made the cryptic statement that vendor wants to discourage comparison with competing products
tjs 12/4/2012 | 10:16:11 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test The simple facts....

1. Quarry is inches from startup death, they have no REAL customers, and the management team is a JOKE. In short they are dead.

2. Tolly will write anything he is paid to write.

Tom
sigint 12/4/2012 | 10:16:03 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test The simple facts....

1. Quarry is inches from startup death, they have no REAL customers, and the management team is a JOKE. In short they are dead.

2. Tolly will write anything he is paid to write.

Tom
__________________________________________________

What you say could be true - doesn't necessarily mean the product isn't any good.

A group of engineers developed a product that many comapanies with 'good managements' wouldn't dare compete against. I would applaud that effort.
wackitabacki 12/4/2012 | 10:16:02 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test It's nice to see that in these uncertain times
in networking that the cynics have all pulled together in order to drag everyone else down.
Granted, if you were a competetor of either one
of these companies (tjs?), maybe you would have
reason to pigeonhole any of their sucesses. If not, what a loathsome and miserable human being
you must be.
I'm not familiar with the management of
either one of these companies, but I continually
read on these pages about all star management
teams that do not even make it to where these
companies are. What's up with that?
NanC 12/4/2012 | 10:16:02 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test Tom, you bozo, this was a competitive test sponsored by Light Reading, not a Tolly test.
Kangaroo 12/4/2012 | 10:16:01 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test Eug+¬nie Larson, Reporter, Light Reading wrote

....The test concentrated on IPSec-based VPNs (virtual private networks), because the alternatives, Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) -based VPNs and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)'s MPLS Martini extensions, are simply not secure enough......
________________________________________________

Eug+¬nie or anyone,

Please help me out here, my understanding is that MPLS is as secure as an ATM or a Frame Relay, is this not correct ?

If MPLS VPN "are simply not secure enough" why are they being deployed ?
asmo 12/4/2012 | 10:16:00 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test Yes, using MPLS as a VPN technology is as secure as existing ATM/Frame Relay technology. I don't understand why some people present MPLS and IPSEC as technologies that are exclusive to each other.

If a company wants to use IPSEC on their traffic and then use MPLS as a VPN technology there is nothing stopping them. But if a company is happy enough with the security provided by ATM/FR based VPNs they are not losing any security benefits by switching to L3VPNs or L2VPNs.

Asmo
CarrierClass 12/4/2012 | 10:15:59 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test Please help me out here, my understanding is that MPLS is as secure as an ATM or a Frame Relay, is this not correct ?
________________________________

Yes you are correct, MPLS offers security comparable to Frame Relay and ATM.

However, this level of security is not adequate for certain customers, e.g. banks, military, etc. In fact, there is a legal requirement that certain types of data must be encrypted when being transmitted over a shared infrastructure.

Edge boxes from vendors like Quarry, Netscreen, and Cosine, allow the service provider to offer IPsec encryption as an additional service on top of basic VPN connectivity.

However, it is yet to be seen how large the market for outsourced IPsec services is. Many large organizations only want a pipe to send their data down and want to handle the encryption themselves - they would not trust a service provider to manage encryption for them.
foptix 12/4/2012 | 10:15:53 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test MPLS security is comparable to ATM and FR, and the only likely threats involve using some form of attack against MPLS router control plane. Exactly similar attacks can be foreseen against IPSEC tunneled operator VPNs.

with respect to IPSEC in operator edge devices, I do not believe that this adds any real security. In this model, the traffic will be encrypted after the subscriber access link, which is and is likely to remain the simplest point for the attacker to tap (physically) onto. The E2E security of the operator IPSEC does not really add anything but huge equipment cost and IPSEC management complexity components over the MPLS tunnel based VPNs.
SeaW 12/4/2012 | 10:15:46 PM
re: Quarry, NetScreen Ace the Test MPLS and IPsec are both useful VPN technologies and each has its own advantages (most notably traffic engineering for MPLS and encryption for IPsec). Encyption does make IPsec more secure, but Asmo has the right idea suggesting that they could be used together to get the best of both worlds. Both technologies are experiencing rapid growth in provider networks, however IPsec is also more mature and, as such, is currently far more widely deployed.

With regard to using IPsec encryption at the edge of the provider's network, it often makes a great deal of sense, and could add real value for many subscribers. For example, my company's point-to-point T1 access link to the Internet is far more secure than the Internet itself. As such, I'm not concerned about encryption until my interoffice traffic reaches the first service edge router on the shared IP network (and I'm happy not to have to monkey around with a CPE VPN device). Similarly, my circuit-switched dial-up connection from home to my ISP is relatively safe, but once my traffic hits my ISP's first router it's much more likely to be exposed to security risks. Encrypting it there at the provider edge and tunneling it back to service edge router closest to my office keeps it safe and makes life easier for me.

SeaW
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE