<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Which ASA to pick in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790181#M495737</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt; The use of multiple contexts and VPN will not work as one issues would be how to split the licensing up across them?&amp;nbsp; If the license allows 200 and you have 10 contexts, you can't get 200 for everyone of them and 20 may not work either.&amp;nbsp; So, VPN doesn't work with multiple contexts.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Failover is separate from contexts though, there are limitations depending on what you want to do.&amp;nbsp; Even the 5505 supports failover (albeit active/standby) but it doesn't support contexts at all.&amp;nbsp; Active/Active does require the use of multiple contexts, so if you wanted VPN, then Active/Standby would need to be used in single context mode at that.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;From what you have described, there is no reason to use multiple contexts.&amp;nbsp; Single mode would work just fine and allow you to have Active/Standby with VPN.&amp;nbsp; If you need multiple contexts, the question is what are you trying to accomplish?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 20:38:11 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>lance_brown</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2011-10-13T20:38:11Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Which ASA to pick</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790178#M495711</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi experts,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I need your advice badly on this... One of our clients is trying to pick an ASA as a gateway to Internet. The ISP Internet Pipe will be 100mbps. The ASA will also handle max 100 remote access IPSec VPN sessions. It will do fair amount of NAT/PAT, filtering, ...etc. My questions are:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1. The datasheet says that 5510 can handle 300mbps throughput. Is it just for one direction so the bi-direction throughput will be just 150mbps? Is the 170mbps VPN traffic throughput included in the 300mbps total throughput or it is addition?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. How real is this "300mbps" throughput? In reality how much can it reach? Will 5510 be enough for our usage?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3. Regarding to the redundancy/failover, does all the 5500 series (except 5505) models do the same? For example, in order to achieve active/active, do I have to have two security contexts running no matter what model I use (even 5580) or the higher models actually can do active/active easily?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;4. Please list the features that the higher models support but not by the 5510 (except just the performance difference)... I'm trying to save their cost but I don't want to miss anything which will cause them to upgrade in the future.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Difan&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 21:37:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790178#M495711</guid>
      <dc:creator>Difan Zhao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T21:37:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Which ASA to pick</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790179#M495721</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt; It is a total of 300Mbps; so it could be 200/100, 150/150, 100/200, 1/299, etc.&amp;nbsp; If they really think they will be using the full pipe in both directions, they could bump up to the 5520.&amp;nbsp; That 300Mbps also says "up to" and that is the key there.&amp;nbsp; In the best of conditions, it can reach that.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The firewall &lt;STRONG&gt;won't&lt;/STRONG&gt;handle 300Mbps of firewall and 170Mbps of VPN for a total of 470.&amp;nbsp; It also says "up to" 170Mbps.&amp;nbsp; This should help you out:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="http://www.hacom.net/kb/ipsec-performance-cisco-asa-5510-measured-iperf"&gt;http://www.hacom.net/kb/ipsec-performance-cisco-asa-5510-measured-iperf&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You can see what the test results were for the 5510 and the 5520.&amp;nbsp; That is not to say that Cisco is wrong when claiming "up to" 170Mbps, just that depending on the test, it may or may not get that high.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, keep in mind that traffic is usually more biased in one direction that both.&amp;nbsp; So if someone has a 100Mbps pipe, one direction will be used more heavily than the other.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As for the failover, it depends on the license you buy.&amp;nbsp; The Security Plus on the 5510 unlocks it so you have Active/Active.&amp;nbsp; You will need two firewalls and identical at that; model, interfaces, software, license, etc.&amp;nbsp; Context wise, that is up to you if you want to use them.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The feature set is pretty much the same across the models.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 19:37:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790179#M495721</guid>
      <dc:creator>lance_brown</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-10-13T19:37:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Which ASA to pick</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790180#M495730</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you Lance!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I just thought of something I need you to confirm:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Multiple security contexts won't work with remote access VPNs, correct? So I can't use Active/Active failover no matter what model I choose, correct?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If yes then I can't expect two ASA to share the load. Any one has to be good enough to handle the entire load.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Am I right??&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thanks!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 20:22:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790180#M495730</guid>
      <dc:creator>Difan Zhao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-10-13T20:22:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Which ASA to pick</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790181#M495737</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt; The use of multiple contexts and VPN will not work as one issues would be how to split the licensing up across them?&amp;nbsp; If the license allows 200 and you have 10 contexts, you can't get 200 for everyone of them and 20 may not work either.&amp;nbsp; So, VPN doesn't work with multiple contexts.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Failover is separate from contexts though, there are limitations depending on what you want to do.&amp;nbsp; Even the 5505 supports failover (albeit active/standby) but it doesn't support contexts at all.&amp;nbsp; Active/Active does require the use of multiple contexts, so if you wanted VPN, then Active/Standby would need to be used in single context mode at that.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;From what you have described, there is no reason to use multiple contexts.&amp;nbsp; Single mode would work just fine and allow you to have Active/Standby with VPN.&amp;nbsp; If you need multiple contexts, the question is what are you trying to accomplish?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 20:38:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790181#M495737</guid>
      <dc:creator>lance_brown</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-10-13T20:38:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Which ASA to pick</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790182#M495742</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you Lance! You made very clear explaination. I was thinking about using multiple contexts because that I wanted both ASAs to share the load so they can better support the 100mbps pipe. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I will probably recommend a 5520 in this case unless they don't have buget for it. I will use Active/Standby to achieve redundancy.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for the help!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:29:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/which-asa-to-pick/m-p/1790182#M495742</guid>
      <dc:creator>Difan Zhao</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-10-13T23:29:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

