PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF VARIOUS FIREWALL IN

VIRTUALIZES DATA CENTER

By
Kaleem Ullah
2004-GCUF-000045

Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of

BACHULAR OF SCIENCE
IN
COMPUTER SCIENCE

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

GOVERNMENT COLLEGE UNIVERSITY, FAISALABAD

November 2003
 DEDICATED

TO
My Graceful and Polite PARENTS

&
All Family Members
Who live in my mind and soul
Whose love is more precious
Than pearls and diamonds
Who are those whom I say my own
Whose love will never change
Whose prayers will never die
 DECLARATION

The work reported in this thesis was carried out by me under the supervision of Mr. Sohail
Ahmad Department of Computer Science, GC University, Faisalabad, Pakistan.
I hereby declare that the title of thesis PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF VARIOUS
FIREWALL IN VIRTUALIZES DATA CENTER and the contents of thesis are the product of
my own research and no part has been copied from any published source (except the references,
standard mathematical or genetic models /equations /formulas/protocols etc). I further declare
that this work has not been submitted for award of any other degree /diploma. The University
may take action if the information provided is found inaccurate at any stage.

Signature of the Student

Name: Kaleem Ullah
Registration No: 2003-GCUF-00053
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

All praise to ALMIGHTY ALLAH, the most merciful and the most compassionate and his Holy Prophet
‘MUHAMMAD’(Peace) be upon him) the most perfect and exalted among and even born on the surface
of earth, who is, forever a torch of guidance and knowledge for the humanity as a whole.

The work presented in this manuscript was accomplished under the inspiring guidance, gorgeous
assistance, constructive criticism and enlightened supervision of Sir. Sohail Ahmad Department of
Computer Science GC University, Faisalabad for his skillful guidance, constructive criticism, masterly
advice, valuable suggestions and sympathetic behavior for the completion of this manuscript.

I feel highly privileged to take this opportunity to express my heartiest gratitude and deep sense of indebt
to my worthy supervisory committee, Sir. Ahmad and Sir. Muneeb Department of Computer Science
GC University, Faisalabad under whose kind and scholastic guidance, keen interest and constant
encouragement.

Words are very important to convey thoughts and thanks, the words are impossible to find to thank our
Father and whole family for their prayers and encouragement for us and for our work.

Finally, I apologize if I have caused anger of offence to any body and the errors that remain in the
manuscript are mine alone.

Kaleem Ullah
 CERTIFICATE BY SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE

We certify that the contents and form of thesis submitted by Kaleem Ullah, Registration No. 2003-
GCUF-00054 has been Found satisfactory and in accordance with the prescribed format. We recommend
it to be processed for the evaluation by the External Examiner for the award of Degree.

Signature of Supervisor ………………….

Name: ……………………………………..
Designation with Stamp…………………..

Member of Supervisory Committee

Signature ………………………………….
Name: ……………………………………..
Designation with Stamp……………………

Member of Supervisory Committee

Signature ………………………………….
Name: ……………………………………..
Designation with Stamp…………………….

Chairperson
Signature with Stamp……………………….
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
S.No Content Page No
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Premable 1
1.2 Background Study 2
1.3 Research Rationale 3
1.4 Problem Statement 3
1.5 Research Questions 4
1.6 Research Aims and Objectives 4
2.0 Literature Review 6
3.0 Materials and Methods 16
3.1 Introduction 16
3.2 Research Philosophy 16
3.3 Research Approach 17
3.4 Research Paradigms 18
3.5 Sampling Technique and Sample 19
3.6 Data Types 19
3.7 Data Collection Instruments 20
3.8 Data Analysis 21
3.9 Reliability, Validity and Limitations 21
3.10 Barriers to SQA in Pakistan 22
3.11 Conceptual Model 24
4.0 Results and Discussion 27
4.1 Quantitative Results of Data Collected from Software Companies 27
4.2 Analysis of Quantitative Results 48
4.2.1 Hypothesis Testing 48
4.3 Qualitative Analysis of Literature Review 58
4.3.1 Quality factor in software projects 58
4.3.2 Software Quality Testing Parameters 58
4.4 Qualitative Analysis of Primary Data 59
4.5 Comparison of Literature Study and Primary Findings 61
4.6 Conclusion 65
5.0 Summary 67
Appendix 70
References 73

LIST OF TABLES

Table Content Page No

Table 1 Where is the company’s head office located? 27
Table 2 How many employees does your company have? 28
Table 3 What type of customer do you have for your product and services? 29
Table 4 Is your company ISO certified? 30
Table 5 Do you think that quality assurance is necessary for good quality 31
software products and services?
Table 6 Does your company have Quality Assurance Department in place? 32

Table 7 If yes, do you have enough resources for quality assurance 33

department?
Table 8 If no, who is responsible for assuring quality of software products 34
and services?
Table 9 Which project management model you are using in your company? 35

Table 10 Do you think that there is a relation between project management 36

model and software quality assurance?
Table 11 Which model you are using to ensure software quality assurance? 37

Table 12 If you do not use any software quality assurance model, does the 38
quality of your software products and services is affected?
Table 13 What are the barriers in implementing international quality 39
assurance standards?
Table 14 To what extent you measure quality of your software products and 40
services on the following parameters -Testability
Table 15 Understandability 41
Table 16 Usability 42
Table 17 Maintainability 43
Table 18 Reliability 44
Table 19 Verifiability 45
Table 20 Portability 46
Table 21 Correlation for Hypothesis One 49
Table 22 Model Summary for Hypothesis One 49
Table 23 ANOVA for Hypothesis One 49
Table 24 Coefficients for Hypothesis One 50
Table 25 Correlation for Hypothesis Two 51
Table 26 Model Summary for Hypothesis Two 51
Table 27 ANOVA for Hypothesis Two 51
Table 28 Coefficients for Hypothesis Two 52
Table 29 Correlation for Hypothesis Three 52
Table 30 Model Summary for Hypothesis Three 53
Table 31 ANOVA for Hypothesis Three 53
Table 32 Coefficients for Hypothesis Three 54
Table 33 Correlation for Hypothesis Four 54
Table 34 Model Summary for Hypothesis Four 55
Table 35 ANOVA for Hypothesis Four 55
Table 36 Coefficients for Hypothesis Four 55
Table 37 Correlation for Hypothesis Five 56
Table 38 Model Summary for Hypothesis Five 57
Table 39 ANOVA for Hypothesis Five 57
Table 40 Coefficients for Hypothesis Five 57

LIST OF FIGURES

Table Content Page No

Figure 1 Conceptual Model 25
Figure 2 Where is the company’s head office located? 28
Figure 3 How many employees does your company have? 29
Figure 4 What type of customer do you have for your product and services? 30

Figure 5 Is your company ISO certified? 31

Figure 6 Do you think that quality assurance is necessary for good quality 32
software products and services?
Figure 7 Does your company have Quality Assurance Department in place? 33

Figure 8 If yes, do you have enough resources for quality assurance 34

department?
Figure 9 If no, who is responsible for assuring quality of software products 35
and services?
Figure 10 Which project management model you are using in your 36
company?
Figure 11 Do you think that there is a relation between project management 37
model and software quality assurance?
Figure 12 Which model you are using to ensure software quality assurance? 38

Figure 13 If you do not use any software quality assurance model, does the 39
quality of your software products and services is affected?
Figure 14 What are the barriers in implementing international quality 40
assurance standards?
Figure 15 To what extent you measure quality of your software products and 41
services on the following parameters -Testability
Figure 16 Understandability 42
Figure 17 Usability 43
Figure 18 Maintainability 44
Figure 19 Reliability 45
Figure 20 Verifiability 46
Figure 21 Portability 47
Figure 22 Hypotheses Results 64

ABSTRACT
CHAPTER No: 1

INTRODUCTION