| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| replacing MQIPT with DataPower feasible? |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| pcelari |
 Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 7:12 am Post subject: replacing MQIPT with DataPower feasible? |
 |
|
Chevalier
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 411
Location: New York
|
Greetings...
MQIPT has been there for a long time, and many organizations use it to enable MQ connectivity across the internet. Now a client asked me if the exisitng age-old MQIPT can be replaced with something newer, and more secure.
The first thing that came to mind was DataPower, which was designed as a hardened secure gateway at the edge of an organization. However, DP doesn't seem to have the capability to serve as a protocol forwarder that MQIPT does. It takes only HTTPS. So any change would be quite involving to all parties that currently use MQClient or Server to communicate with us through the transparent MQIPT.
So here're my questions:
1. Is it a valid statement that MQIPT is somehow obsolete?
2. If it is, what's the best direction to proceed?
3. Is DataPower a valid option? and how?
thanks a lot for sharing your insight!
_________________
pcelari
-----------------------------------------
- a master of always being a newbie |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 7:37 am Post subject: Re: replacing MQIPT with DataPower feasible? |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| pcelari wrote: |
| Now a client asked me if the exisitng age-old MQIPT can be replaced with something newer, and more secure. |
Why "newer"? Is the client worried it's not shiny enough? What's the average age of some of the other network components? I bet that, even if it's the latest version, the DNS server in use at the client's site is based on some age-old principles.
How "more secure"? What's insecure about MQIPT? Is the client fully leveraging the increased security of more modern MQ versions, which I think is where effort is better placed.
| pcelari wrote: |
So here're my questions:
1. Is it a valid statement that MQIPT is somehow obsolete? |
No.
See this from the latest MQv9 documentation.
| pcelari wrote: |
| 2. If it is, what's the best direction to proceed? |
See 1 above as well as my comments on security in the newer MQ versions.
| pcelari wrote: |
| 3. Is DataPower a valid option? and how? |
No. It's intended for a different use case.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| pcelari |
| Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chevalier
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 411
Location: New York
|
Wow, what an insight! Thank you so much!
I have to admit, having been working with MQ for so many years, one tends to become somewhat complacent, and stops/slows down exploring all the new features added to the product little by little. it seems chlauth and authrec are only a tiny portion of the security features added in the past years.
Actually, someone stated to me: "MQIPT is a technology from the day before yesterday". So instead of believing MQIPT is getting old, I've got to catch up with added features, or I'll become obsolete faster than it 
Many thanks!
_________________
pcelari
-----------------------------------------
- a master of always being a newbie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| pcelari wrote: |
| I have to admit, having been working with MQ for so many years, one tends to become somewhat complacent, and stops/slows down exploring all the new features added to the product little by little. it seems chlauth and authrec are only a tiny portion of the security features added in the past years. |
You bet your sweet contact admin!
I can do no better than refer you to the musings of @Morag both here and on the MQGem web site. If there's anyone better than her talking about the new MQ security features, they're probably just ripping her off.
| pcelari wrote: |
| Actually, someone stated to me: "MQIPT is a technology from the day before yesterday". |
Yeah, I have millenials like that working here. And it's true - MQIPT has been around a while. So have DNS servers (as I alude to above) and relational databases. If you pointed a DBA who worked on a version of DB2 or Oracle "the day before yesterday" I bet they would recognize it and be productive almost immediately, and even more so once they'd mastered all the innovations.
I can only share my reaction to such comments for what they're worth. I admit (with a rueful expression) that the oldest piece of technology we have is the mainframe & they should put together a working group to replace it; such working group to include the Finance & Security teams.
I don't hear about old technology again. I sometimes don't hear about the person again.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
