which FWSM version to run (1.1 or 2.2)

[davecs]

hi all,

which of these two versions are most stable?

i am particularily interesting in using 2.2's same security level traffic passing feature. I assume that once this is enabled you must define ACL's to let traffic through? or are they allowed thru by default?

cheers.

dave.

[irelandsky]

Hi,

i've bad experience with rel 2.2 on my FWSM.

1) When i upgrade from 1.1(3) to 2.2(1) ( cause i would like to use same security level command) after 30 min of work the blade stopped to forward traffic.

I've opened a tac case, and cisco told me that the problem could be caused by same security level command.

The work around ( 2 month ago ) was to downgrade to 1.1.(3).

2) Same security level command enable you to not configure NAT between virtual interface, with same security level, on your FWSM

I think that is a good feature, but at the moment i can't upgrade to 2.2(x) release cause my fwsm is in production environment and is very hard to schedule a stops of it.

I hope this help

Marco

[shamilton-wilkes]

Similarly, it's a major deal to have an outage on our FWSMs, but I'd like to be able to run multiple virtual firewalls.

Is anyone running 2.2 without major issues?