[Snort-users] OT: Re: Foundry performance?
cmg at ...1935...
Mon Jun 30 08:05:25 EDT 2003
"Roy S. Rapoport" <snort-users at ...9230...> writes:
> I'm not running Foundry currently, but I was instrumental in getting my
> rather large company to switch from being Cisco-only to Foundry about three
> years ago. The stories I could tell about their customer service could
> amaze you*. Sure, they were cheaper and faster than Cisco. But their
> support ruled! :)
[Note: personal experiences from 2 years ago... Not relavant today to
me or Sourcefire]
That was very much true when they were a small company and would do
anything for a sale. I've managed 400+ of their work group switches of
various vintages so I've seen a lot of their problems over time.
When I was @ UAB, we were using their HTTP transparent proxy stuff
to implement a spam shield and I found all sorts of gross bugs with
pass through access and had awesome technical support.
Later, when I was trying to play with their rate limiting, it was very
difficult to get support to say that it was broken when giving a port
argument rather than just an IP.
I recall trying very hard to get them to turn their
turboiron/serveriron platform into a gigabit hub as well but to no
As a quote, I very fondly recall a Foundry engineer in broken English
telling me "That can not be a bug because this product has been
properly QA'd". I use that ancedote all the time for telling people
how they should treat commercial bug reports.
Chris Green <cmg at ...1935...>
This is my signature. There are many like it but this one is mine.
More information about the Snort-users