<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Performance issue on PA-5050 with profile active in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/performance-issue-on-pa-5050-with-profile-active/m-p/48517#M35720</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;It's possible this is not really a throughput issue but a TCP windowing/latency issue.&amp;nbsp; Activating profiles introduces a small amount of latency that can affect throughput for single flows at very high bandwidth if not properly accounted for.&amp;nbsp; You can try tweaking the TCP windowing or running more flows through the box to get maximum throughput.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Not sure if this is the case in your lab, but it is something I have seen in high throughput environments in the past.&amp;nbsp; Might be worth checking into.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Cheers,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Kelly&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 00:10:07 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>kbrazil</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2011-11-10T00:10:07Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Performance issue on PA-5050 with profile active</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/performance-issue-on-pa-5050-with-profile-active/m-p/48515#M35718</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've ran into an interesting throughput issue with a PA-5050 in my lab, maybe someone can shed some light on this strange behaviour.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The setup: PA-5050 running 4.0.7&lt;BR /&gt;Two aggregated trunks: AE1 &amp;amp; AE2&lt;BR /&gt;AE1 assigned to VSYS1 (Server VSYS)&lt;BR /&gt;AE2 assigned to VSYS6 (Client VSYS)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The test:&lt;BR /&gt;FTP download test from a Windows2003 machine (with FileZilla) in VSYS1 to an XP client in VSYS6. Both machines&lt;BR /&gt;are connected with a single GigE connection.&lt;BR /&gt;The test files on the FTP server:&lt;BR /&gt;- 70MB ZIP file &lt;BR /&gt;- 200MB EXE file&lt;BR /&gt;- 400MB ISO file&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I get a consistent 60% bandwidth usage "ceiling" (no peaks, no drops) during the downloads of this files, which is what can be expected for a GigE connection without jumbo frames active.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Now the fun stuff: when I activate a (any) profile (being it either IPS, AV, Anti Spyware or even only URL filtering) and this on the matching security rule (in either VSYS1 or VSYS6) I get the following bandwith usage values (measured on the XP workstation) during the transfer:&lt;BR /&gt;- 70MB ZIP file: 5% bandwidth, but fluctuates between 0,5 and 15%&lt;BR /&gt;- 200MB EXE file: 5% bandwidth ceiling (no drops, no peaks)&lt;BR /&gt;- 400MB ISO file: 60% bandwith usage (ie "normal")&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If I enable a profile in both VSYS1 and VSYS6, the throughput drops by half:&lt;BR /&gt;- 70MB ZIP file: 2,5% bandwidth, but fluctuates heavily between 0,2 and 8%&lt;BR /&gt;- 200MB EXE file: 2,5% consistently&lt;BR /&gt;- 400MB ISO file: 60% bandwith usage&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any thoughts as why I see such a major throughput drop in this PA-5050 box when I activate a profile ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 22:48:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/performance-issue-on-pa-5050-with-profile-active/m-p/48515#M35718</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nico</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-11-09T22:48:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issue on PA-5050 with profile active</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/performance-issue-on-pa-5050-with-profile-active/m-p/48516#M35719</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I suggest that you open a support case so that we can debug this behavior.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Benjamin&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 22:50:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/performance-issue-on-pa-5050-with-profile-active/m-p/48516#M35719</guid>
      <dc:creator>bpappas</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-11-09T22:50:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issue on PA-5050 with profile active</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/performance-issue-on-pa-5050-with-profile-active/m-p/48517#M35720</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;It's possible this is not really a throughput issue but a TCP windowing/latency issue.&amp;nbsp; Activating profiles introduces a small amount of latency that can affect throughput for single flows at very high bandwidth if not properly accounted for.&amp;nbsp; You can try tweaking the TCP windowing or running more flows through the box to get maximum throughput.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Not sure if this is the case in your lab, but it is something I have seen in high throughput environments in the past.&amp;nbsp; Might be worth checking into.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Cheers,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Kelly&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 00:10:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/performance-issue-on-pa-5050-with-profile-active/m-p/48517#M35720</guid>
      <dc:creator>kbrazil</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-11-10T00:10:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance issue on PA-5050 with profile active</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/performance-issue-on-pa-5050-with-profile-active/m-p/48518#M35721</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Kelly,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the suggestion. I have no traffic going through the box, only the ftp test traffic. I tested multiple ftp connections, and indeed the throughput doubles with each stream (from 5% bandwidth usage to 10% with 2 simultaneous ftp downloads).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I also did some sniffer traces and I don't see anything out of the ordinary there.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'll do some more tests today and open up a case via our integrator&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:18:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/performance-issue-on-pa-5050-with-profile-active/m-p/48518#M35721</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nico</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-11-10T08:18:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

