[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       nanog
Subject:    Re: Experience on Wanguard for 'anti' DDOS solutions
From:       Ramy Hashish <ramy.ihashish () gmail ! com>
Date:       2015-09-30 6:05:18
Message-ID: CAOLsBOt-ECMqAver1zhBRa0_yurtPKoFSnEfhyzcsqNgzui0dg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Again Fabien,

Why didn't you use A10 for both detection and mitigation?

Thanks,

Ramy

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Fabien Delmotte <fdelmotte1@mac.com> wrote:

> Hello
>
> My 2 cents
> You can use Wanguard for the detection and A10 for the mitigation, you
> have just to play with the API.
>
> Regards
>
> Fabien
>
> > Le 12 août 2015 à 16:28, Ramy Hashish <ramy.ihashish@gmail.com> a écrit
> :
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 08:14:54 +0200
> >> From: "marcel.duregards@yahoo.fr" <marcel.duregards@yahoo.fr>
> >> To: nanog@nanog.org
> >> Subject: Re: Experience on Wanguard for 'anti' DDOS solutions
> >> Message-ID: <55C992DE.3020906@yahoo.fr>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
> >>
> >> anybody from this impressive list ?:
> >>
> >> https://www.andrisoft.com/company/customers
> >>
> >> -- Marcel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Anybody here compared Wanguard's performance with the DDoS vendors in the
> > market (Arbor, Radware, NSFocus, A10, RioRey, Staminus, F5 ......)?
> >
> > Another question, have anybody from the reviewers tested the false
> > positives of the box, or experienced any false positive incidents?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ramy
>
>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]