[isapros] Re: ISA, Exchange 2007 and Perimeter Networks

  • From: "Gerald G. Young" <g.young@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: <isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 09:40:50 -0500

The DMZ in Korea itself isn't crawling with military.  Either side of it
is, ensuring that the definition of a demilitarized zone is observed and
maintained.  Before the advent of DMZs in networking, a DMZ meant an
area from which military forces, operations, and installations were
prohibited.  Essentially, it's a wide empty area that constitutes a
border with forces on either side pointing guns into it.

 

I've always thought the adaptation of the acronym to the world of
networking a bit strange.  "Oh!  We got activity in our networked DMZ!
Kill it!" J

 

Cordially yours,

Jerry G. Young II

Product Engineer - Senior

Platform Engineering, Enterprise Hosting

NTT America, an NTT Communications Company

 

22451 Shaw Rd.

Sterling, VA 20166

 

Office: 571-434-1319

Fax: 703-333-6749

Email: g.young@xxxxxxxx

 

From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Amy Babinchak
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 7:08 PM
To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [isapros] Re: ISA, Exchange 2007 and Perimeter Networks

 

That's what it means to me too. Can't see the Korean no mans' land as
qualifying as a DMZ when it's crawling with military. 

 

In this conversation we have to take into consideration that CAS also
includes the capability to provide access to folders and files right in
OWA. This may be the thing that the Exchange team thinks throws a monkey
wrench into the secure deployment of CAS in a a DMZ. 

 

________________________________

From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Jason Jones
Sent: Sat 1/13/2007 6:46 PM
To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isapros] Re: ISA, Exchange 2007 and Perimeter Networks

For me, DMZ means scary place completely untrusted, perimeter network
means less scary place trusted to a degree, but strongly controlled

 

________________________________

From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Thor (Hammer of God)
Sent: 12 January 2007 23:51
To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isapros] Re: ISA, Exchange 2007 and Perimeter Networks

Interesting... Probably a good idea for us to actually articulate what
we really mean when we say DMZ.

I guess to some it means "free for all network" but for me, it should be
the network where you have the most restrictive policies controlling
each service so that it is obvious when malicious traffic hits the wire.
Thoughts>
t


On 1/12/07 3:30 PM, "Steve Moffat" <steve@xxxxxxxxxx> spoketh to all:

That's what I thought, now it's what I know....
 

From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Jim Harrison
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 6:35 PM
To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isapros] Re: ISA, Exchange 2007 and Perimeter Networks

Aside from normal router & switch ACLs, ISA is the single line of
defense.
"..we don't need no stinking DMZs"
 

From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Steve Moffat
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 12:12 PM
To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isapros] Re: ISA, Exchange 2007 and Perimeter Networks

Ahh...just had a thought.
 
It's all labeling.
 
Jason, and others (not Jason's fault), have been using the term DMZ.
 
Historically, is the term DMZ not taken literally as being completely
firewalled off from the trusted networks, and what Jason is talking
about is trusted network segmentation.
 
I betcha that's why the Exchange team don't support it...they think it's
a typical run of the mill DMZ...
 
Jim, isn't MS's Internal network segmented by usin ISA?? Including your
mail servers?
 
S 

All mail to and from this domain is GFI-scanned.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. isapros
  3. Archive
  4. 01-2007