Notifications
Notifications
CDW Logo

Juniper Networks SRX650 Services Gateway - security appliance

Mfg.Part: SRX650BASESRE6645A CDW Part: 1815281 | UNSPSC: 43222501
Quick tech specs
  • Security appliance
  • GigE
  • 4 ports
  • 2U
View All

Know your gear

The SRX650 is a mid-range dynamic services gateway that consolidates network infrastructure and security applications for regional offices, large branch offices, and small to medium enterprises. The services gateway provides cost-effective, scalable integration of routing, security, and other mid-range applications for these sites.

The SRX650 Services Gateway has a modular 2U chassis that fits a 19-inch rack with a depth of approximately 18.1 inches. It contains a rear-pluggable Services and Routing Engine (SRE) module that provides robust performance for mid-range applications, particularly routing and security services.

This item was discontinued on October 06, 2022

Enhance your purchase
Juniper Networks SRX650 Services Gateway - security appliance is rated4.05 out of5 by20.
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Large total throughput, and we are able to change configurations without downtimeHow has it helped my organization?* Manipulation of rules* Flexibility in day-by-day useWhat is most valuable?Junos is the best OS for networks. It is very powerful and flexible.The rollback option and Commit Confirmed are great features. They give us the security to change configurations without downtime.What needs improvement?It would be good if Junos had "unique commands" between all hierarchical levels, discarding the use of the "Run" command.The robustness of Linux on top of Junos can be more effective after power down.For how long have I used the solution?Less than one year.What do I think about the stability of the solution?No stability issues.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?No scalability issues.How is customer service and technical support?High level of technical support.Which solutions did we use previously?We used Fortinet, and changed to Juniper to use Junos.How was the initial setup?Easy.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?Pricing is very good, not expensive.What other advice do I have?We use the SRX1500 with Junos 15.1X49-D75.5.I rate the product 10 out of 10. It is very strong and Junos is very powerful. The total throughput is very large.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2018-01-25T00:00:00-05:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Consolidation combines routing, switching, and firewall services in one deviceWhat is most valuable?* Form factor: It is small, very nimble, and can be deployed in very small environments which do not have wiring closets.* Consolidation: It combines routing, switching, and firewall services in one device.* Stable OS: There is a one Junos release training for all the Juniper products, thus minimizes the training needed and enhances interoperability.* Open standards: The Juniper OS is based on the open standards and making it very interoperable in the mixed vendor environments.* Superior performance: This can be achieved by true separation of control and data plane, hence data plane inefficiencies do not affect the control plane and vice versa.* Cloud-enabled device: The SRX300 is cloud-ready and can be used to implement SDSN in micro-environments.How has it helped my organization?It has greatly reduced the network management functions by reducing the number of devices to manage (one vs three), and easy fault management using the new GUI.What needs improvement?Disaggregation (this is available in the box) should be improved to include software intelligence that is actionable.For how long have I used the solution?I have used this solution for about four and a half years.What do I think about the stability of the solution?There were no stability issues. It is a very stable and reliable product. It can run for several years without a single glitch.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?It is highly scalable for its target market.How is customer service and technical support?The technical support team is very co-operative and gives quick responses for the logged cases. A hundred percent of the logged cases have been resolved within the SLA period.Which solutions did we use previously?We looked at MikroTik ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/vendors/mikrotik ). However, more features such as the performance, scalability, and consolidation were available on the Juniper device.How was the initial setup?The initial setup was simple and can be done 100% via the GUI.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?The price per performance value is the best out there in the market. No licensing is needed for all the features apart from the security part, i.e., no licensing for extra services and VPN comes free in the base.Which other solutions did I evaluate?We evaluated the FortiGate ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/fortinet-fortigate ) 80 and 60 series and Cisco ASA ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/cisco-asa ) 5500.What other advice do I have?The Juniper SRX300 is a stable and very reliable product, packed with a lot of capabilities that are not available in the competing products of the same range. I would highly recommend this product to anyone interested in implementing it.This box has it all and is more for the small-scale branch market. Packaged as an all-in-one routing, switching, and security solution, the SRX300 minimizes the need to deploy separate devices to perform these functions by leveraging on its consolidation, all coming with the carrier-grade capabilities.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2017-07-05T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Good Layer 3 and Layer 4 protection, but the solution is not end-to-endWhat is our primary use case?Juniper SRX is solely used as a firewall gateway. We use it only for interfacing with the internet and for server farms, as a data center firewall gateway.What is most valuable?Most of our clients use it as a traditional firewall, blocking Layer 3 and Layer 4, blocking by transport.What needs improvement?We also use firewalls from FortiGate and Palo Alto and they're built with technology to make them next-generation firewalls. Juniper utilizes a router OS and includes enhancements to make it a firewall. But FortiGate and Palo Alto are full-on firewalls because they are built from scratch with features which are specific to firewalls.Juniper needs to enhance the solution so that it is more powerful. They need to update the administrative tools to create an easier admin experience. An average administrator would find it easier to configure if they could use https rather than the command line interface to do so.In addition, it would be more powerful if Juniper brought out a security product other than firewalls, like anti-spam, endpoint protection, etc. Customers who want to deploy security solutions are not just thinking about firewalls. They're thinking about security across their environment. If Juniper could give me a security solution, beyond the firewall, that integrates with the firewall, that would be helpful. Other products have built a security fabric. So if a customer already uses one of their solutions, like a firewall, they will be thinking about integrating with that vendor's other products. If there is more than just a firewall solution, they will use that same vendor's products throughout the security environment. A security fabric is more powerful than just blocking via network parameters.Juniper should have an end-to-end solution, from the endpoint to the network level. It would provide a more powerful security solution to the customer. Customers are looking for a holistic security solution.For how long have I used the solution?Three to five years.What do I think about the stability of the solution?For one to three years it's stable.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?If users want to scale up the firewall, they basically want the cheapest firewall that gives them powerful features. Most users choose FortiGate rather than Juniper. Technically, Juniper's scalability is good. But when customers look at the overall price, FortiGate will come out cheaper than Palo Alto or Juniper.How are customer service and technical support?The technical support is good. The engineers help support our customers day-to-day.How was the initial setup?The setup depends on the deployment, on what we have to configure. But from one firewall to another firewall, it's about the same. They're not really complex. We have experience using the command line and the user interface. If you ask me which one is easier to configure, I will answer that configuring through the user interface is easier.The amount of time the deployment takes depends on the complexity of the solution. If the firewall is used as an L3 firewall or L4 firewall, for blocking by IP address and, it's going to be faster to deploy than deploying the firewall using Unified Threat Management. In that case, we need to carefully tune the VPN configuration.What was our ROI?The time for one of our customers to achieve ROI depends on the scalability of the product. It also depends on the type of organization. If it's a hospitality or government organization, it will take them more time to achieve ROI than an internet service provider, where using this product is in line with their business objectives.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?In terms of pricing, Juniper is in the middle. The most expensive firewall is Palo Alto. If a customer wants the cheapest price they should go for FortiGate. Juniper is in between these products.Which other solutions did I evaluate?From experience, we like to use firewalls from Palo Alto and FortiGate because the solution is easy to configure with a UI to execute the app. If we use Juniper firewalls, we don't really use the UI because it is not as easy as the command line interface for configuration.The VPN is different between Juniper and Palo Alto. As far as I know, Juniper does packet inspection in their VPN. Functions like anti-spam and antivirus are running step-by-step. Once the anti-spam processing is done, it goes on to antivirus scanning. But with Palo Alto, the technology is different. It copies each packet to each function. For example, if we activate anti-spam, antivirus, and another check, Palo Alto makes three copies of each packet and inspects them in parallel. This makes the system faster, compared to Juniper. This is the biggest difference as far as I know.What other advice do I have?Juniper is good at the routing protocol. If you want a solution to protect your environment from the internet, I would propose a firewall gateway solution but ultimately it depends on what the customer needs.We are partnered with Juniper, so if customers ask for a firewall solution, the first solution that we pick is generally a Juniper firewall. If a customer wants a firewall other than Juniper, we offer it. Usually, we will do a firewall like FortiGate or Palo Alto, if the customer has enough money, as Palo Alto is very expensive.Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:Partner.
Date published: 2019-04-07T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from The operating system and the flexibility it provides is what really differentiates this solutionWhat is our primary use case?The primary use case is a combination of a firewall, router, and VPN termination device.How has it helped my organization?It allows us to do remote configuration changes, and if there is a problem, not losing connectivity to the device.What is most valuable?I really like the Juniper operating system. It is more of a UNIX based system, more than Cisco, and I really like it. There is a lot of flexibility in how you can commit, check, and back out of a configuration.What needs improvement?In terms of improvement, it could use more on the security side. It's a good stable firewall, but it's nowhere near what it needs to be for a next-generation type firewall.They also need to improve their documentation. With Cisco, you can find lots of examples, but with Juniper, it is not always the case. One area that needs more focus is instruction on how to interoperate with other vendor's products. I would like to see documentation on running IPsec tables between Fortinet and Juniper or Cisco and Juniper because the information is not there.Their technical support also needs improvement, as they are lagging behind Cisco.For how long have I used the solution?Eight years.What do I think about the stability of the solution?This is a very, very stable solution. Again, their operating system is outstanding. Really, this is what differentiates it.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?In terms of scalability, it clusters nicely so you can put it into a stacked mode. The size that it is meant to serve, it does very well. It is not meant as a large enterprise-type firewall. Rather, it is meant for a small to medium sized customer.We currently have about seventy-five users, and we don't plan to increase that number at this time.How are customer service and technical support?I would say that their technical support is ok, but it needs improvement. This is an area where they are not as good as Cisco.If you previously used a different solution, which one did you use and why did you switch?We migrated to this solution from a Cisco ASA (Adaptive Security Appliance).How was the initial setup?Transitioning from the Cisco ASA that we had running took about two hours of planning and another two hours of execution time.In terms of the maintenance, myself and one other person take care of everything. We take on small contracts all over the place.What about the implementation team?I handled the implementation for this solution myself.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?The pricing is perhaps half to around forty percent of Cisco.Which other solutions did I evaluate?Juniper is my favorite and I had used it so much that we did not evaluate any other products.What other advice do I have?This solution is really nice to use. It's very similar in terms of capabilities to a Cisco, but it's just that the operating system is so much nicer to use.I would say that you need some time to get comfortable with the operating system if you've never used it before, but don't let that scare you. Buy it and put it on your desk for a week, then play with it. If you've got a live environment or if you've got some type of simulation you can set it up in, it won't take long and you can feel comfortable using it.I would rate this product an eight and a half out of ten.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2019-05-10T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Easy to implement and use, with better technical support than other solutionsWhat is most valuable?The most valuable features in this solution are AppSecure and the IPsec VPN.What needs improvement?The solution previously had a Clientless SSL VPN, but it has been removed and I would like access to it again.The GUI needs improvement. I can work fine with the command line (CLI), but new people would like a better user interface.I would like to see an SSH VPN in the next release.For how long have I used the solution?Almost ten years.What do I think about the stability of the solution?I am very satisfied with the stability of this solution.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?We have more than one hundred users for this solution. They range from non-technical, Level 1 users, up to administrators, technical support staff, and expert-level users.How are customer service and technical support?I am satisfied with their technical support. It is better than what I have experienced with some other solutions.If you previously used a different solution, which one did you use and why did you switch?This is the first solution that we implemented.How was the initial setup?I find the setup simple, given that I have been using it for ten years. The deployment is quite easy and fast.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?The price of this solution is more than other products, but it's stable, and the technical support is better than I have seen with others.Which other solutions did I evaluate?The solution was in place before I joined the company, so I am unaware if we evaluated other solutions.What other advice do I have?We have found this solution to be easy to implement and easy to use. It is a little more expensive than some products, but it is worth the investment.I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2019-05-18T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from They should add a dashboard because the product is difficult to operate. It is not that expensive.What is our primary use case?The Juniper SRX that we have is being used as a firewall. Somehow, it is performing.The product is a normal router with basic firewall capacity. We don't have a dedicated firewall. Therefore, I don't have high expectations from Juniper.How has it helped my organization?It helps us perform our daily jobs.What is most valuable?We are using it as a normal type of firewall.What needs improvement?I would like them to add a dashboard because it's difficult to operate.The product only has basic features.For how long have I used the solution?Less than one year.What do I think about the stability of the solution?The stability is normal.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?The scalability is normal.How are customer service and technical support?I haven't used technical support, just local support.How was the initial setup?The initial setup was complex.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?It is not that expensive.Which other solutions did I evaluate?We are evaluating Palo Alto, Barracuda, and Sophos because we need a Next-Gen firewall.What other advice do I have?It crashed, and we could not change it for some reason. I don't want to keep Juniper within my network anymore.Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:* Dedicated support team* Easy configuration.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2018-08-08T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Lowered our operating costs by 25% over three years, mostly recovered from maintenance/support costsWhat is our primary use case?During our last network refresh, we did a wholesale forklift upgrade from Cisco to an entire Juniper network infrastructure, including Juniper SRX router/firewall/IDP, EX Series switches, and QFX Series core switches. The entire process took over two years to complete, but once it was completed, we were extremely happy with the Juniper equipment in terms of costs, performance, maintenance, and the ability to function as we needed.How has it helped my organization?* Once our engineers got their heads wrapped around the nuances of Juniper's CLI (took them about six months) with training (mostly free) and were able to get settled into Junos OS, we never looked back.* SRX firewalls/IDP functions require similar technical knowledge level as Cisco ASA and are function on par with them. I recommend investing in Juniper Space if you have a significant amount of Juniper equipment to manage. We have three of the larger SRX550s, with one cluster configuration, for edge security devices (firewall/IDPs). We are very happy with them.* Not specifically in SRX category, but the 40Gb/10Gb interfaces in the QFX gear are truly wired for speed on all available ports. The virtual EX switch chassis configuration, where up to 10 switching devices can be managed as a single network device, is a solid configuration for us. We use it in three locations and have zero issues with it.What is most valuable?* I am really hesitate to repeat the Juniper sales line of "One Juniper", simply because within different devices, there are differences in the CLI commands used. This has been due to functional and hardware differences. For the vast majority of the Juniper CLI commands, if you learn them for the SRX, they are the same for the EX and QFX series switches. There is little to no differences between the Junos OS versions* The "candidate configuration" and rollback features are real life savers. They are different from what Cisco does. At a Cisco CLI, when you hit enter, the command is live. Using a Juniper CLI, you configure a "candidate configuration", then "commit" it to bring it live. If you do not like it or messed up something, you just "rollback" to the previous configuration. It can all be done in a matter of minutes. This is super handy once you get use to it.* Juniper has the "recovery safety feature", so if you perform a "commit confirmed" and the new configuration disconnects you. then there is no "confirmed" command with X mins (default = 10 mins). It automatically reverts (recovers) to the previous configuration. This is handy for when you do not want to make that trip down range just to reboot a router.What needs improvement?Third-party support for Juniper is a lot less than Cisco. This is no surprise, but a definite consideration if you are expecting to use a lot of third party support. In my guesstimate, for every 100 Cisco shops, you will find one Juniper shop.For how long have I used the solution?Three to five years.How is customer service and technical support?JTAC (Juniper Networks Technical Assistance Center) is just okay for technical assistance. However, if you are used to Cisco TAC responsiveness, you will need to adjust your expectations with Juniper Networks TAC.I could normally fix my issue with Cisco on the first or second call, speaking with the first Cisco TAC engineer (Tier 1) that I spoke with. Juniper Networks TAC is just as good, but in my experience, it takes about two to three times longer to get the same results. It is not unusual to require escalation before the issue is resolved. Juniper simply does not have the depth and number of Juniper experts as Cisco.What was our ROI?We were able to lower our overall operating costs over a three year period by 25%, mostly recovered from maintenance/support costs.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2018-05-27T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from It protects the data behind our switchesWhat is our primary use case?We use it as a perimeter firewall, data center firewall, and as VPN concentrators for some companies. It protects the data behind our switches. Our company provides the switches, like the EX-Series.We are an elite partners for Juniper. We use the firewall for data protection.How has it helped my organization?It has a high security implementation.What is most valuable?It integrates well with Fortinet and Palo Alto.It uses many applications, like antivirus blocking and web filtering. Also, defining routing on it is very easy along with netting. The high availability of the application is good. We use the IDS and IPsec VPN features.What needs improvement?I would like to see endpoint control and endpoint testing security.The GUI needs to be easier to handle.For how long have I used the solution?Less than one year.What do I think about the stability of the solution?The stability is good.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?The scalability is good.How is customer service and technical support?When we face problems, it is a firmware or software update. We call Juniper for support and they have a very good team for technical support. They help us a lot, then we will find the solution in the upgraded version of software of unit.Which solutions did we use previously?I think there was a problem before I came to the company with Cisco and their firewall, so they decided to switch to Juniper.How was the initial setup?It is more complex than other vendors, but we have gotten used to it. So, we find it easy to implement and deploy.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?It has a low price.Which other solutions did I evaluate?We are also using Fortinet and have a partnership with Palo Alto. In addition, we are looking into a partnership with Citrix.Cisco and FortiGate were on original shortlist.What other advice do I have?They can use the Juniper SRX as a data center firewall. Juniper needs to focus more on their perimeter firewalls.Our most important criteria is to look for 24-hour support, prices, partnerships, and what they offer to partners. Also, we want to know if the product can function with Juniper.Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:Partner.
Date published: 2018-08-08T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Routing needs improving, however, it's a straightforward setup.Valuable Features* Traceoptions* Commit check* Route/IPSEC VPNImprovements to My OrganizationIt provides us with easy options for troubleshooting.Room for Improvement* Switching* RoutingUse of SolutionI've used them for two years.Deployment IssuesNo issues encountered.Stability IssuesNo issues encountered.Scalability IssuesThere were limited security zones with each model.Customer Service and Technical SupportCustomer Service: 10/10.Technical Support: 9/10.Initial SetupIt's a straightforward setup for us as we have a configuration template.Other Solutions ConsideredIt depends on our customers requirements.Other AdviceCheck the customer requirement first.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2015-04-15T00:00:00-04:00
Rated 5 out of 5 by from There were no issues with the deployment but the GUI needs to be improved.Valuable Features* Unified OS - free BSD UNIX* IDPImprovements to My OrganizationWe’ve connected this product on a GSM core network for a 3G deployment project.Room for ImprovementThe GUI.Use of SolutionI've used it for one year.Deployment IssuesNo issues encountered.Stability IssuesNo issues encountered.Scalability IssuesNo issues encountered.Customer Service and Technical SupportCustomer Service: It's good.Technical Support: It's good.Previous SolutionsOur customer decided to switch from Cisco to Juniper for their security deployment.Implementation TeamIt was an in-house implementation.Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:We have a latinum partnership
Date published: 2015-04-29T00:00:00-04:00