Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36
  1. #11
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    14

    Thumbs up Could not agree more

    Quote Originally Posted by proactivens View Post
    You get what you pay for. Compare untangle to any of the big players in the market, cisco, sonicwall, ect. Your getting enterprise class firewall services, plus a boat load more. Your telling me that $850-1000 is too much to spend on hardware to run it? Go out and get a cisco or a sonic wall solution for that price, with these features. I dare you.
    You are 110% right.
    This is a great product and I am a complete fan.

    Anyone that expects to have 100% hardware and software compatibility for any product much less open source is either totally inexperienced or a complete idiot.

    This is a great product and I have absolutely no complaints about the product or support forums.

    I realize the limitations and have realistic expectations which is why I use the two box method.

    If the new release of the product requires more hardware that just has to be factored in when you make the decision as to the proper solution for each client.

    TOM

  2. #12
    Untangle Ninja raditude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    1,143

    Default

    I am not arguing what security is worth, nor wanting to debate it. In a perfect world we could all have endless top of the line hardware for this or any need. The facts are that UT is a GREAT product, I have recommended it over and over as well as installed it at multiple sites, so you are preaching to the choir on the comparison to the other products on the market.

    However with that being said the situation I am in, NO the companies can not afford to fork out 1k for new hardware, it has nothing to do with a lack of desire, or neglect to security, it is all financial.

    Also the question I think that is really being asked here is more so why the huge increase in boot time? I am OK with it taking 7-10 min to boot if that is what it is going to take on the hardware we have, but I as well as other seem to be scratching our heads as to why the large increase?

    Unfortunately tcjmiami we dont have the hardware, nor funds to have a full blown backup to be able to quickly swap. I like the idea, but in our case the practicality does not allow us this benefit/luxury. Also with the target market being SMB's there are not a lot of them I have been involved with/employed by that can do this either. Now I have worked for some larger ones (still considered as SMB's by definition in the market place) that do have this luxury, and when I was employed with them I would be able to have access to some latest/greatest hardware to throw into place to shorten boot time/have available for failover..etc.

    I still have the question if the extended boot time means unfiltered traffic to/from the LAN for longer periods? tcjmiami has addressed how he gets around this, and that is a GREAT work-around, but for those of us who can not afford an option like that, we just want to know what we are faced with. I mean if I have to pull the internal ethernet plug during reboot to avoid 2-10 minutes of unfettered traffic, that is something I would just like to know. Chances are I wont do that, mainly because I do try to reboot during off-peak hours, thus I have minimal users on the LAN to be effected by it, but it is just good information to know. IMO knowledge of the sysem = good

  3. #13
    Untangle Ninja proactivens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Greensburg, Pa
    Posts
    2,362

    Default

    I understand what you are saying, but I dont think your getting my point. I understand budgets are tight, but what are you going to get with $200 to protect your networks? A netgear, dlink, or something similar? Unless your talking about tiny networks, 1-50 users, then the answer is nothing. You dont need a monster server to run a network that size, but you do need more than a P4.

    Untangle isn't your run of the mill linux firewall running iptables and such. Sure, it runs iptables, but it also runs java virtual machines, and does a ton of very complicated mathematical equations. You combine the two, and you have a very memory and processor intensive product that requires more hardware than what some people put into their systems. Some of the systems you guys are talking about are not adequate. Sure, they will run, but they wont run well.
    www.nexgenappliances.com
    Toll Free: 866-794-8879
    UNTANGLE STAR PARTNER
    Follow us at spiceworks!

  4. #14
    Untangler
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Well said raditude. We've been running UT on an older box for the better part of a year. Reboots have taken a couple of minutes max. Now they are taking 8-9 minutes after a fresh install of 6.1. I did the fresh install after I upgraded and found the boot times so long I figured something got munged up in the upgrade.

    It's puzzling why boot times would have tripled with an upgrade to 6.1. What is 6.1 doing on boot that previous versions didn't?

  5. #15
    Untangle Ninja proactivens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Greensburg, Pa
    Posts
    2,362

    Default

    Untangle is experiencing what all software and OS's experience over time. Would you expect a copy of windows xp to boot as fast as a copy of windows 98 on a pentium II system? The new core has new features, and was designed to take advantage of the power of new hardware.
    www.nexgenappliances.com
    Toll Free: 866-794-8879
    UNTANGLE STAR PARTNER
    Follow us at spiceworks!

  6. #16
    Untangle Ninja raditude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    1,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcjmiami View Post
    If the new release of the product requires more hardware that just has to be factored in when you make the decision as to the proper solution for each client.

    TOM
    I believe this sums it up.

    PROACTIVENS I do not disagree with what you are saying, the difference is we have been running a solution for a while now, a new version came out and there is a side effect. The end product still works great on the hardware in question, no complaints there, CPU/RAM/Disk all run very low once it is up and running, it is strictly the boot process that I have noticed the huge increase in.

    UT is a GREAT product, I endorse it faithfully, I use it faithfully, I know that the folks dev it are doing a great job, the forums are the best I have experienced with any product.

  7. #17
    Untangle Ninja sky-knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    26,510

    Default

    I have a p4 1.7ghz at my secondary site, 1gb of ram... the unit only takes 5min to crank up...

    My dual core AthlonXP 2400+ with 1gb takes about 2min... the quad 2.4 xeon takes about 45 seconds... I'm not seeing a difference here.

    If you're worried about the defensive properties of untangle while the UVM cranks up keep two things in mind...

    1.) IPtables is there and working as soon as the kernel loads, create packet filter rules to control truly critical things instead of firewall rules.
    2.) You still have NAT, so in the price bracket that most here are talking about, UT is never degraded worse than that of a basic SOHO router.

    Guys, proactivens is dead on, to be fair if you have a unit that you have sold to a customer and that unit is anything less than a 1ghz dual core with 1gb of ram. Shame on you! You knew better.

    Open Source doesn't mean cheap alternative!
    Rob Sandling, BS:SWE, MCP
    NexgenAppliances.com
    Phone: 866-794-8879 x201
    Email: support@nexgenappliances.com

  8. #18
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    14

    Default What it really takes to run the product.

    Ok so we now have a product that requires more hardware.

    That is the reality and we either have to live with it or go to something else.

    I have used the "cursed" dlink linksys etc products before and I still have a few out there, mostly as cold standby for backup purposes.

    The cost of my two box scenario has been running about $250 for each box from ebay with new power supplies and CPU fans installed for reliablity.

    If I have to start using a $1000 box as the primary it just means that backup will have to be the "CURSED" netgear or linksys etc.

    The wiki for required/reccomended hardware needs to be changed to show the new reality of the product. This would avoid having newcomers buy an insufficient machine or waste time trying to determine what is wrong.

    TOM

  9. #19
    Untangle Ninja proactivens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Greensburg, Pa
    Posts
    2,362

    Default

    Dead on, as usual. I think some people look at this like a cheap alternative, and dont give it the resources it needs. It's funny, if they sold this product and it wasn't open source, then I guarantee you people would take it more seriously.
    www.nexgenappliances.com
    Toll Free: 866-794-8879
    UNTANGLE STAR PARTNER
    Follow us at spiceworks!

  10. #20
    Untangle Ninja sky-knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    26,510

    Default

    No the mins are still the min... but those numbers are based on just running the product with no rack modules. I've been arguing those numbers be changed for months in favor of what it takes to run the open source rack with a 20 user network.

    The sad truth of this is that it isn't in UT's control! The system requirements for Debian Sarge (UT 6.02) and Debian Lenny (UT 6.1) are very different.
    Rob Sandling, BS:SWE, MCP
    NexgenAppliances.com
    Phone: 866-794-8879 x201
    Email: support@nexgenappliances.com

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2