A10 Thunder ADC

We need a server balancer and a WAF for a large number of sites in a network company. We use A10 Thunder ADC Networks to use both features. The objective was to implement more than 150 websites so they would be balanced on 4 servers. The balancing algorithm would be in a round-robin, and for the WAF, a custom configuration would be implemented, in which there would be a configuration for the front end sites and others for the back end. For the creation of HTTP templates, I used the graphical interface of A10 Thunder ADC, while my colleague used the CLI; I can say that in both ways, A10 Thunder ADC is easy to use and does not require advanced knowledge. Our problem occurs with the limit of sites allowed in the HTTP policies, where we could not exceed 64 sites, this caused us to leave the project aside and use an alternative. However, the positive aspects of A10 Thunder ADC are that as a balancer, it is very good and it distributed the load without problems, whereas the WAF was put in learning mode for 2 weeks and then switched to active mode and there were no major failures. If there were policies in the WAF files that were not detected in learning mode, they could easily be changed in the WAF templates.

• Load balancing
• Application availability
• WAF

• A10 Thunder ADC had a negative impact on the company, due to the fact that the client had to monitor a large number of sites, which could not be achieved with this device.
• This led to looking for another alternative.
• It is more beneficial for companies that do not need to monitor a large number of websites as the security and stability provided by the device are excellent.

Qualys Web Application Scanning (WAS), ManageEngine ADAudit Plus, Tenable.io

• Allow routing instances in the device, this would increase the benefits much more and compete very well with other vendors.