Isa

I ordered the trial version of Microsoft's ISA server. Part of their new .NET architecture -- Internet Security Architecture....it's supposedly some kind of packet filtering firewall....the next generation proxy server....

Anyone done any testing on it yet?

My trial software has arrived ... so I'm asking again .... has anyone else yet gone for a spin on the Microsoft ISA server .... their next gen, .NET rev of proxy.....

I'm going to try to get it loaded up, sometime this week but was just wondering if I'm about to take a nose-bleed header from 40000 ft w/o a parachute!

Ok...ok....ok.... so maybe no one has tried it yet ... but what have you guys heard/read about the product? :p

I haven't used it at all but this site seemed to have a decent amount of info. There are discussion threads and message boards at this site. Hope this helps...

http://www.isaserver.org/pages/links.htm

I tried it once.

I needed a quick and dirty web caching proxy for about half a day.(our ms proxy server 2.0 had a catastophic failure.... and we were switching over to another proxy anyway)
Seemed to work ok.

Again, all I used it for was web caching, while we went around to everyones comp and switched their proxy settings.

Yes...I have used MS Proxy.net....lol

ISA is just OK for a proxy server, but it just seems to me like MS and security products do not flow well together. Don't get me wrong...I do use MS products (even though they are not my favorite.....freebsd...*hint*). MS just obviously has a pretty poor track record in this arena.

If you want my personal recommendation for a proxy server, look at CacheFlow..

I appreciate everyone's input! I just want to try it out and run it through it's paces...so to speak :p

I agree that MS + security = oxymoron

I also believe in mixing the platforms and products used as opposed to being "standardized".

With MS on the desktops, I prefer other things on the perimeter, but I also like to test things and play with new toys :rolleyes:

Microsoft security thats A ISSUE BY IT'S SELF!

I'd go with a cacheflow box, myself. M$ ain't cuttin it.
We have about 1000 people pulling from two cacheflow boxes and they are very happy. Plus the cacheflow boxes take allot less administration. I mean with M$ it's *reboot* wait a few days *reboot* fix whatever broke while rebooting and of course to save changes *reboot*......and on and on and on..