F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) vs. SonicWall TZ

We were able to eliminate a firewall from our network architecture by integrating the module into our existing F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM). This allowed us to save on tech refresh costs, since the F5 was able to handle the module without much additional strain on the device. However, if a firewall had features that the AFM lacked, then using that firewall in tandem with an F5 would be preferable.

Incentivized

Good price for scope of functionality Challenge for those that are not highly technical Many options within Firewall Setting that need to understood to maximize use of the device. Would be nice to see some sort of configuration wizard to assist in configuring unit.

Incentivized

• Port based controls
• Ease of using address objects

Incentivized

• If you have multiple sites and you want the connect the sites through secure medium this is best firewall for you.
• There are very advanced features helps you to connect the device easily and securely.
• Easy to connect the sites through advanced routing protocols.

Incentivized

• More intuitive user interface
• Better naming conventions
• Fewer navigation steps to prevent abstraction

Incentivized

• management is confusing has many items that could be improved to facilitate the work to the network administrator
• in the diagnostic tool I would improve the response times, that is, if a ping test is required, it should be quick, since in cases of failures it is sought to minimize the impact as much as possible.
• each function has a different license item, I would place a single license package for all team functions

Overall the new interface is very logical and easy to navigate. We did struggle at first coming from the older interface and finding our way around the new. But our new users found it very simple to find what they were looking for. One negative we do all struggle with is packet cpature not always being clear how its set/what is being monitored. this could do with more information on teh intial page instead of having to look for it

Incentivized

F5 Advanced Firewall Manager has been a solid, strong solution to both keep our systems safe and being seamless for our end users. Most of the time, the end-user is not impacted and does not even know F5 Advanced Firewall Manager is running which is exactly what we are looking for.

Incentivized

Once you get to a competent technician the support experience is better. But I have found that the lower tiers of support are very slow to respond (like 1 email per day) and you typically have to re-explain yourself a couple times before they get it. I have not used Phone support, and that may be a better experience.

Incentivized

Both F5 [BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager] and Radware require training as they are not easy to use. But Radware uses some configuration that needs deep learning and proper labs. From an admin's perspective, Configuration and management for F5 [BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager are] less. Also, the cost of implementing F5 [BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager] is lesser than that of Radware Alteon.

Incentivized

SonicWall and WatchGuard are both fine appliances, but I am accustomed to the Barracuda NG. The Barracuda Control Center is so powerful and useful that it beats out the other two. SonicWall does a great job of dividing up firewall rules and NAT policies, but this is a preference among engineers.

• Easy maintenance reduces support hours.
• Consistent experience reduces user learning curve.

Incentivized

• We have three SonicWall TZ devices and they are very helpful in a VPN set up.
• The subscription costs for the different features has a great return on investment. It is very well worth the money.
• The antivirus component has been very effective on the computers and servers the SonicWall TZ device protects.

Incentivized