Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/InfoExpress
Deleted as spam then contested as notable and non-spam, even though I did not delete it on spam grounds rather notability issues as it did not read as spamish when I deleted. I wish to find community consensus on this article. Darthgriz98 04:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Weak keep provided the author adds some clear evidence of notability. It's claimed that InfoExpress invented Network Admission Control (NAC), which certainly would be notable if anyone agreed - but they don't. Cisco (who definitely are notable) say NAC is "a set of technologies and solutions built on an industry initiative led by Cisco", and other sources refer to InfoExpress as simply one of the players. andy 14:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Reply
Thank you for letting me discuss this. I moved the Talk contents below, since it seems relevant. Let's start with definitions:
Network Access Control (NAC) is the generic term for at least 2 core attributes: checking endpoint posture and quarantining based on the results of the check. This term was coined around 2004, although products existed before that. Network Admission Control is Cisco's proprietary version of Network Access Control, announced late 2003. Network Access Protection is Microsoft's version of Network Access Control, announced much later. InfoExpress delivered the first general in-line network access control product in late 2001, with even earlier versions of NAC built into its other VPN products.
Citations:
Cisco's first announcement (Nov 2003)
This was just an announcement, without a product for another 7 months. Note the key features noted of NAC - posture checks and the ability to quarantine endpoints using the network.
http://www.cisco.com/web/UK/news/pdfs/17_nov_selfdefending.pdf
Gartner References to NAC (2004)
http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=125210
InfoExpress In-line NAC (announced Dec 2001, reviewed early 2002)
CyberGatekeeper supported the 2 key attributes of NAC cited in the Cisco announcement that followed 2 years later (posture check and quarantine), and also featured automated remediation which was not present in products until much later.
Review of CyberGatekeeper in-line NAC in 2002
http://www.networkcomputing.com/1310/1310sp3.html
Announcement of CyberGatekeeper inline NAC in Dec 2001
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2001_Dec_5/ai_80555002
InfoExpress also had a version of NAC built into their VPN product in 2000 that enforced use of a personal firewall. This was almost certainly the first version of NAC, but it's hard to dig up references for that. Since 2001 is already pretty far back, I'll let it stand with the Dec 2001 article.
Mrpinebox 22:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
From Talk:InfoExpress
Network Access Control is one of the key network security technologies today. Although little known, InfoExpress invented Network Access Control back in 2000, when embedding the functionality into its VPN product. The company also invented the first in-line NAC in 2002, and the first NAC solution to use VLANs to quarantine in 2004.
These key innovations are core parts of most commercial NAC solutions today.
Citations:
First in-line NAC Solution
http://www.networkcomputing.com/1310/1310sp3.html
First VLAN based NAC Solution
http://www.networkcomputing.com/showitem.jhtml?docid=1503sp1
For these reasons, Network Computing recently wrote this tidbit. http://www.networkcomputing.com/gallery/2006/1221/1221f10c.jhtml
Even though the company is small, I feel it merits inclusion in Wikipedia for the following reasons:
1. Its historical importance within the NAC space 2. The company description is no more promotional than other public companies listed 3. NAC is a key security technology today, and the company that invented the key innovations in this market should be in Wikipedia.
Mrpinebox 22:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Weak delete unless some of the assertions above or in the article are sourced. If justified, there should be industry sources. 2001 s not too far back for such sources to exist. I don't regard the Cisco statement as definitive proof of non-notability, as Cisco may have its own reasons for downplaying companies such as this. DGG 01:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC)