[THIN] Re: Microsoft buys SSL VPN Company.....
- From: "Douglas A. Brown" <dbrown@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:00:15 -0400
Yes, I agree... here is a bit more info from a WS firm covering
Citrix... sort of interesting and gives more insight in to Microsoft's
purchase. .
Microsoft announced the acquisition of Whale Communications, a privately
held Israeli company that provides SSL VPN and Web application firewall
products, for $75 million. The company's Intelligent Application Gateway
is based on a Windows platform and provides SSL VPN, endpoint security,
and application security capabilities. Gartner estimates that Whale
generated approximately $13.4 million in SSL VPN appliance revenue in
2005.
Windows Platform Limits Potential Impact. Whale's products are built on
Windows Server 2003, and many organizations do not install
Microsoft-based solutions in their networks' DMZs due to security
issues. We believe that this issue will limit the potential end market
for Whale's product even if the technology is owned by Microsoft. As an
example of the restriction of Windows-based solutions, Citrix Systems'
MetaFrame Secure Access Manager (MSAM) solution, which was the company's
SSL offering prior to its acquisition of Net6, experienced limited
acceptance partially due to its deployment on the Windows platform.
Conversely, the Citrix Access Gateway appliance acquired from Net6 is
Linux-based, and data points from our conversations with the channel
lead us to believe that the Linux-based CAG appliance has reopened many
markets that were "closed" for MSAM because of the Windows restrictions.
Why Did Microsoft Buy Whale? Whale has developed special optimizations
for high-value applications, including SharePoint, Domino, and Outlook
Web Access. In fact, Microsoft and Whale had already partnered to
provide Intelligent Application Gateway - ISA Edition to combine IPSec
VPN, SSL VPN, endpoint security, and application security. Microsoft
currently relies on hardware partners for the deployment of ISA Server
(including HP and Network Engines) and, as such, may discontinue the
Whale appliance. While this combined solution may be attractive to
Windows-based enterprises, we believe that the addressable market is
somewhat limited, and we expect minimal impact on the overall SSL VPN
market.
Outlook. We have been encouraged by Citrix's expanding product portfolio
with the acquisitions of Net6, NetScaler, and Reflectent and the
introductions of Access Essential and Project Tarpon, as we believe that
this expanding product set positions Citrix to redefine the company from
just "the MetaFrame guys" to a broader access solutions vendor. With the
combination of the product cycle potential of PS4 and strong new product
traction, we reiterate our Outperform rating and our target price of
$48.
Douglas A. Brown
President and Chief Technology Officer
Microsoft MVP, Windows Server
DABCC, Inc.
Phone: (954) 778-9558
Fax: (248) 479-0621
E-mail: dbrown@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:dbrown@xxxxxxxxx>
Web: http://www.dabcc.com <http://www.dabcc.com/>
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Steve Greenberg
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 4:03 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Microsoft buys SSL VPN Company.....
Now THAT is VERY INTERESTING!!!
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85262
(602) 432-8649
www.thinclient.net
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Douglas A. Brown
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 12:26 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Microsoft buys SSL VPN Company.....
A bit off subject but not really....
Did you guys see that Microsoft just acquired a SSL VPN company???
Weird, hardware... but it is a Windows based VPN... unlike the CAG that
is Linux. To learn more check this out:
http://www.dabcc.com/dabcc/webapplication/aspx/dabcc.content.aspx?intPKT
ext=1921&intPKChannel=13
What do you think?? I think this is going to be very interesting for
Citrix as they are going to compete with Microsoft in the SSL VPN (CAG)
and the app deploy (Tarpon) markets...
DB
Douglas A. Brown
President and Chief Technology Officer
Microsoft MVP, Windows Server
DABCC, Inc.
Phone: (954) 778-9558
Fax: (248) 479-0621
E-mail: dbrown@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:dbrown@xxxxxxxxx>
Web: http://www.dabcc.com <http://www.dabcc.com/>
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Steve Greenberg
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 3:22 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway / AAC bits
I don't recall the license port, but it is the standard one and is in
the documentation. When you enable AAC mode the CAG's no longer require
an explicit license entry, the AAC takes that over as well as most other
functions. You can secure the communication between CAG and AAC with SSL
port 443 or just 80 and 9005 for management.....
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85262
(602) 432-8649
www.thinclient.net
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of l.bagdasarian@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 10:24 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Steve Greenberg
Subject: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway / AAC bits
Thanks Steve.. I didn't know that the Presentation Server license Server
can be used to license CAGs.
What ports is it communicating to the CAGs: is it citrix port? Can it
be changed to 443?
If we think to add AAC later, can we continue using a Presentation
License Server or we need to move it to the AAC license Server?
Thanks again
Larisa
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Steve Greenberg" <steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
With CAG 4.2 you can actually use the same Citrix license server
you use for Presentation Server if you want to. In this case, it is the
standard netbios name of the server, i.e. just the machine name (you can
type hostname at the command line to see this)
Alternately, you can upload the license file into the CAG box
itself. In that case you use the value entered is in the filed called
"FQDN" on the network setup screen. When doing this the licenses, and
the cert by the way, are included in the backup file so be sure to save
off the config, this could save you a lot of work if you ever have a
hardware failure or have to rebuild the boxes.
If you already have a Citrix licensing server I recommend using
it when you have more than one CAG.
Also note that the when you fulfill your license file from
www.mycitrix.com <http://www.mycitrix.com/> you do have to provide the
license server hostname. However, these licenses can be returned and
reallocated to a different hostname if needed.
Regards,
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85262
(602) 432-8649
www.thinclient.net
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________
From: l.bagdasarian@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:l.bagdasarian@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 2:23 PM
To: steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: FW: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway / AAC bits
Steve,
Can you answer this quick question, for me please.
We just received 2 new CAGs and I need to set them up
as quickly as possible.
I am fairily new to Citrix and didn't work with the CAGs
yet. ( I've impelmented the software version of CSG in our env.))
The documenation on CAG is pretty detailed. The
question I have is about the licensing.
As I understand, once you download it with the wrong
host name -its unpossible to change it. ???
I am in the process of downloading the CAG licenses and
need to enter the host name.
What do I use? Is it the URL (common name) that is
assigned to our external DNS? like hostname.insurity.com?
I don't see any other host names that is being assigned
to the CAGs.
Thanks in advance.
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: "M" <mathras@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway / AAC bits
Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:39:10 +0000
Mind expanding upon the enterprise deployment
components ?
Are you doubling things up for failover ?
Seperate AAC components ?
Using Netscaler ?
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Greenberg
<mailto:steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 4:54 PM
Subject: [THIN] Re: New Access Gateway /
AAC bits
Great timing, right in the middle of an
Enterprise deployment and seeing some of these issues!
thanks
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85262
(602) 432-8649
www.thinclient.net
<http://www.thinclient.net/>
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of M
Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 1:15 AM
To: Thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] New Access Gateway / AAC
bits
4.2.2 released
http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX108902
New AAC Update
http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX109402
________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail message is
intended only
for the personal and confidential use of the
recipient(s) named
above. This message may be an attorney-client
communication and/or
work product and as such is privileged and confidential.
If the
reader of this message is not the intended recipient or
an agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient,
you are
hereby notified that you have received this document in
error and< BR>that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying
of this
message is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
e-mail, and
delete the original message.
Other related posts:
