pfSense Review
The product is missing a graphic report implementation tool but performance, scalability and customization are valuable


Valuable Features:

Performance, cost effective, scalable, customizable

Improvements to My Organization:

After switching from Cisco, Juniper, Astaro and Microsoft network response improved and more control of packet (for me, pfpacket technology is better than packet filter.)

Room for Improvement:

Graphic report implementation tool (now possible with extra software)

Use of Solution:

5+ years.

Scalability Issues:

No, perfect scalability from 20 to 500 users

Previous Solutions:

Cisco, Microsoft and when TMG progressively died it was necessary to switch to unix technology, many corporations require low budget and high performance.

Initial Setup:

The initial approach is very complex because of the multiple functions, but after a short learning curve it is able to handle the standard functions.

Implementation Team:

In my case, I buy network appliance from Lanner Inc. ltd (watchguard supplier) and deploy the image depending on the desired size and functionality required by the customer.

Cost and Licensing Advice:

Identify the most suitable hardware for the required size.

Other Solutions Considered:

Yes, Astaro and PaloAlto plus Juniper, but the renewal planes (AV, UTM, etc.) are very expensive.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
1 visitor found this review helpful

Add a Comment

Guest
Why do you like it?

Sign Up with Email