<?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: PA-500 Throughput in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/pa-500-throughput/m-p/77331#M42569</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Not really, they publish the minimum specs, e.g. what the device is capable of at 64 byte packets/second.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Ive pushed more then 1Gb/s through a PA200, but that was full size packets.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 01 May 2016 10:10:01 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>BrettBrown</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-05-01T10:10:01Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>PA-500 Throughput</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/pa-500-throughput/m-p/76835#M42441</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The PA-500 datasheet indicates that the maximum throughput for traffic being filtered by App-ID is 250Mbps&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/content/dam/pan/en_US/assets/pdf/datasheets/pa-500/pa-500-ds.pdf" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/content/dam/pan/en_US/assets/pdf/datasheets/pa-500/pa-500-ds.pdf&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What it doesn't say, is what if I just have two devices connected to two 1Gb ports and the PA is just doing switching between the two ports&amp;nbsp;without doing App-ID or threat prevention? &amp;nbsp;Can I get at least 1Gb of throughput across the backplane of the firewall between these two ports?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What is the total throughput capacity of the PA-500 without limiting it by App-ID, threat prevention or IPSec VPN? &amp;nbsp;I'm assuming it has be be more that 1Gbps since each interface is 1Gb capable and less than 100Gbps but does someone have a number?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2016 21:06:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/pa-500-throughput/m-p/76835#M42441</guid>
      <dc:creator>RustyPA</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-21T21:06:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PA-500 Throughput</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/pa-500-throughput/m-p/76853#M42444</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I've heard of PA-200s pushing 700Mbps. &amp;nbsp;Palo severly under reports their capacity specs. &amp;nbsp;Capabilities are just going to depend on what the appliance is doing.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What are you doing on the 500? &amp;nbsp;Do you have 0 security policies doing any sort of application control or any profiles and you're expecting to get 2Gbps of switching throughput?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 01:12:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/pa-500-throughput/m-p/76853#M42444</guid>
      <dc:creator>Brandon_Wertz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-22T01:12:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PA-500 Throughput</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/pa-500-throughput/m-p/77311#M42566</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Ok thanks for the input. &amp;nbsp;For example,&amp;nbsp;suppose the PA does the following:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Has one port that faces the public internet. &amp;nbsp;This one port will have some filtering and policies. &amp;nbsp;It needs to handle only a very small amount of bandwidth (&amp;lt;10 Mbps)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-However the PA doubles as a backup to a small Cisco switch in a small remote office. &amp;nbsp;If the regular Cisco switch goes down we want to have redundant links from the server to the PA and from the PA to the NA so that the PA could handle storage traffic from a server to a NAS, until we get the other switch back online. &amp;nbsp;This storage traffic would take 4 ports - 2 for the server and 2 for the NAS. &amp;nbsp;For the traffic between these ports we don't need any filtering or security policies whasoever.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm hoping those 4 ports dedicated to handling backup traffic in a failure scenario could handle 2Gbps across the backplane&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 19:11:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/pa-500-throughput/m-p/77311#M42566</guid>
      <dc:creator>RustyPA</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-29T19:11:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PA-500 Throughput</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/pa-500-throughput/m-p/77331#M42569</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Not really, they publish the minimum specs, e.g. what the device is capable of at 64 byte packets/second.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Ive pushed more then 1Gb/s through a PA200, but that was full size packets.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 01 May 2016 10:10:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/pa-500-throughput/m-p/77331#M42569</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrettBrown</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-05-01T10:10:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

