|
|||||||||||
|
RE: Cisco Catalyst IDS comments
From: Fitton, Robert (Bob) <Rfitton(at)laborready.com>
Date: Wed Jul 09 2003 - 12:17:44 EDT I would hope that the IDSM2 will be an improvement; we liked the concept, but not the initial implementation.
Bob Fitton
-----Original Message-----
Hi, I would appreciate any comments regarding IDSM1 and IDSM2 blade-modules for the Cisco Catalyst 6500 Series. I found detailed comparison among them at Cisco website (max bandwidth, signature tuning, log mechanism,...): http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2706/ps5058/ IDSM2 seems to be quite more powerful than IDSM1 and looks more stable because of it is Linux Based instead of Windows NT. I would like to know if any of you has played with them and could give me its 'practical' opinion. Constructive/destructive comments are welcomed! ;) At first sight, it seems flexible and powerful to deal with the switch backplane. Any known disadvantage of blade cards in front of 'appliances/black boxes'? Thanks in advance for your help,
__
/ / Carlos Fragoso Mariscal
C E / S / C A Communications & Operations Dept.
/_/
The Lightning Console aggregates IDS events, correlates them with vulnerability
info, reduces false positives with the click of a button, and distributes this
information to hundreds of users.
Visit Tenable Network Security at http://www.tenablesecurity.com to learn more. Received on Fri Jul 11 13:00:19 2003 This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 23 2006 - 14:01:16 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||