[isalist] Re: WAFR
- From: "Thomas W Shinder" <tshinder@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 14:27:07 -0500
Hmmm. I get a blank page now.
Thomas W Shinder, M.D.
Site: www.isaserver.org <http://www.isaserver.org/>
Blog: http://blogs.isaserver.org/shinder/
Book: http://tinyurl.com/3xqb7 <http://tinyurl.com/3xqb7>
MVP -- ISA Firewalls
________________________________
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ball, Dan
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 2:03 PM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] Re: WAFR
I just noticed that the current revision of the article doesn't
contain the "proxy firewall" phrase anymore...
________________________________
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Harrison
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 9:52 AM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] WAFR
http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=18810114
8
"Microsoft has a firewall, of sorts, in the Internet Security
Acceleration (ISA) Server, which is more of a proxy
<http://www.channelweb.com/encyclopedia/defineterm.jhtml?term=proxy&x=&y
=> firewall
<http://www.channelweb.com/encyclopedia/defineterm.jhtml?term=firewall&x
=&y=> than the heavy stateful-inspection kind marketed by Check Point,
Cisco and Juniper."
I guess research isn't required any more...
All mail to and from this domain is GFI-scanned.
Other related posts:
