F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) vs. Juniper SRX

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

Juniper vSRX is an excellent edge gateway device. The combination of Tunneling protocols supported and the advanced routing & security features makes it perfect for this kind of deployment. It is available in physical, virtual appliances as well as support on multiple clouds so you can have the same box be your edge gateway in multiple environments for consistency.

It can also work as a Internet Gateway, DMZ Firewall/Router and it would function just fine.

While it can also work as a DC firewall (North-South), the poor GUI will make it harder in the day to day administration for the multiple policies in a DC.

Incentivized

• Port based controls
• Ease of using address objects

Incentivized

• The Juniper SRX platform is easy to set up (out of the box).
• The support team responds to tickets quickly and with good solutions.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

• Some of the more complex setups (clustered HA, etc.) can be a little difficult to configure.
• The lowest-end model that supports true multi-site HA is relatively expensive. It would be nice to have that option in lower models.
• Some configuration options (particularly the way address book entries are done) can get tedious and make for very long configs.

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

This is the one area where I have a beef with Juniper. When I called into Cisco TAC, 90% of the time, the first person I spoke with was able to resolve my issue. With Juniper TAC, 90% of the time, the first person I speak with is not able to resolve my issue, seems to almost be reading from a script, and must escalate my ticket. All of which takes time.

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

Equipment prices ran about the same. Performance and management were also more or less equal. The biggest deciding factors for going with Juniper were (1) fewer security incidents related to SRX firewalls and (2) technical support costs were significantly less.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

• It is a workhorse for our field operations. It provides the last touch for an ISP to the customer. The customer has no view of the device, but with the repeatability of the device, they do not need to.
• The ability to roll out a dynamic routing protocol attached to a security zone allows elasticity to the environment that supports growth.
• VLAN support on the inside interfaces allow this to be the only device in some smaller deployments we install these in.

Incentivized