<?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: SecureXL Fast Accelerator - Need to clarify packet flow in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114814#M16090</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have corrected it in the following articles:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.checkpoint.com/docs/DOC-3041-r80x-security-gateway-architecture-logical-packet-flow" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;- R8x - Security Gateway Architecture (Logical Packet Flow)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Update-R80-20-Security-Gateway-Architecture-Logical-Packet-Flow/m-p/60401#M12218" target="_self"&gt;- R8x - Security Gateway Architecture (Logical Packet Flow) - Update R80.20+&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/R80-x-Performance-Tuning-Tip-SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator/td-p/67604" target="_self"&gt;- R8x - Performance Tuning Tip - SecureXL Fast Accelerator&amp;nbsp; (R80.20 JHF103+)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2021 19:22:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>HeikoAnkenbrand</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-03-28T19:22:10Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>SecureXL Fast Accelerator - Need to clarify packet flow</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114651#M16042</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;taking a look to this packet flow:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="R80.20 Logical Packet Flow fast accel 0.1a.JPG" style="width: 594px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/11171i230A47C2628B21C6/image-dimensions/594x821?v=v2" width="594" height="821" role="button" title="R80.20 Logical Packet Flow fast accel 0.1a.JPG" alt="R80.20 Logical Packet Flow fast accel 0.1a.JPG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;From the diagram I understand that if i put a rule in the fast accelaration table, not explicitally permitted in the rulebase, it is accepted.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Well, I just did a test, allowing A-&amp;gt;B in the fast accel table, but it was dropped by clean up in the rulebase.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Only allowing connection in rule base, let it hit the Fast Accel Table&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Anyone can clarify this? So first connection have to be checked in rulebase like traditional secureXL ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thank you&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:09:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114651#M16042</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckPointerXL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-26T14:09:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL Fast Accelerator - Need to clarify packet flow</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114783#M16079</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;A rule would still be required in the FW blade, but if you have additional security blades enabled (example IPS/AV/ABOT), these would be by-passed; in the logs you would simply see a entry indicating the traffic was fastaccel.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It's one of the reason only trusted traffic should be added, and keep in mind there is a limited number of rules you can add to fastaccel table.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The above is my understanding, happy to be corrected.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Mar 2021 18:07:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114783#M16079</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-27T18:07:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL Fast Accelerator - Need to clarify packet flow</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114788#M16081</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;hi Genesis,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for your reply.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Of course i Agree the way you described which correspond with the result of my lab test.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT color="#000000"&gt;What i can't understand is that diagram (and the ones found in&amp;nbsp;sk156672 too). Waching them I think is clear that Fast accel table is something with no relation and to an upper level from the rulebase.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT color="#000000"&gt;Definitively, it seems both are not pertinent with how FW works.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT color="#000000"&gt;Any speech is appreciated&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2021 07:23:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114788#M16081</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckPointerXL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-29T07:23:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL Fast Accelerator - Need to clarify packet flow</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114800#M16083</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Starting in R80.20, the first packet of every new connection goes to a worker instance for an Accept Template check and if there is no matching template, a Firewall/Network Layer rulebase lookup happens next.&amp;nbsp; If the connection is accepted by the template/rulebase and fast_accel is present for that connection's attributes, the connection is usually reinjected back into SecureXL for subsequent handling in the accelerated path.&amp;nbsp; This reinjection can also happen for a non-fast_accel'ed connection that does not require any deep inspection handling; fast_accel just makes this much more likely.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Note that if there is an inspection condition present that requires use of the F2F/slowpath handling for that connection, the fast_accel will not be applied even if present and the connection will still go F2F on a Firewall Worker.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2021 12:14:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114800#M16083</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-28T12:14:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL Fast Accelerator - Need to clarify packet flow</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114807#M16087</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Keep in mind that diagram is not an official diagram.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;“Fast Accel” specifically impacts the decision to send something to PXL/Medium Path.&lt;BR /&gt;Anything that matches a Fast Accel rule that would normally go to the PSL/Medium Path instead goes to the Accelerated Path.&lt;BR /&gt;Traffic can still hit the F2F/Slow Path for other reasons.&lt;BR /&gt;And, in all cases, you still need to have an Access Policy rule that permits the traffic.&lt;BR /&gt;And, as noted elsewhere, you should only Fast Accel trusted connection flows.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2021 17:49:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114807#M16087</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-28T17:49:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL Fast Accelerator - Need to clarify packet flow</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114809#M16089</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/54489"&gt;@CheckPointerXL&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It is not possible to create a packet flow overview with all paths.&amp;nbsp;You are right. "Fast Acceleration Rules" only work for allow packets.&amp;nbsp;This is a schematic overview&amp;nbsp;in my article &lt;A href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/R80-x-Performance-Tuning-Tip-SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator/td-p/67604" target="_self"&gt;R80.x - Performance Tuning Tip - SecureXL Fast Accelerator&amp;nbsp; (R80.20 JHF103+)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It is also important whether it is the first package or a subsequent package. "Fast Acceleration Rules" only work for subsequence packets which are normally sent to PSLXL path (medium path).&amp;nbsp;If "Fast Acceleration Rules" are used, the packets are sent to the acceleration path and &lt;STRONG&gt;not &lt;/STRONG&gt;to the &lt;STRONG&gt;PSLXL&lt;/STRONG&gt; path.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;DIV id="tinyMceEditor_5153a6b961656cHeikoAnkenbrand_0" class="mceNonEditable lia-copypaste-placeholder"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="accel_path_d_2b.PNG" style="width: 737px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/11190i1C8975CEF037E1AE/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="accel_path_d_2b.PNG" alt="accel_path_d_2b.PNG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2021 19:16:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114809#M16089</guid>
      <dc:creator>HeikoAnkenbrand</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-28T19:16:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL Fast Accelerator - Need to clarify packet flow</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114814#M16090</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have corrected it in the following articles:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.checkpoint.com/docs/DOC-3041-r80x-security-gateway-architecture-logical-packet-flow" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;- R8x - Security Gateway Architecture (Logical Packet Flow)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Update-R80-20-Security-Gateway-Architecture-Logical-Packet-Flow/m-p/60401#M12218" target="_self"&gt;- R8x - Security Gateway Architecture (Logical Packet Flow) - Update R80.20+&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/R80-x-Performance-Tuning-Tip-SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator/td-p/67604" target="_self"&gt;- R8x - Performance Tuning Tip - SecureXL Fast Accelerator&amp;nbsp; (R80.20 JHF103+)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2021 19:22:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114814#M16090</guid>
      <dc:creator>HeikoAnkenbrand</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-28T19:22:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL Fast Accelerator - Need to clarify packet flow</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114840#M16096</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/21670"&gt;@HeikoAnkenbrand&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/7"&gt;@PhoneBoy&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/597"&gt;@Timothy_Hall&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thank you for your precious feedback.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I think now is more difficult to mislead who is approaching 'fast accel' in detail.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2021 07:11:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/SecureXL-Fast-Accelerator-Need-to-clarify-packet-flow/m-p/114840#M16096</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckPointerXL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-29T07:11:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

