<?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: fwaccel still not perfect in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/fwaccel-still-not-perfect/m-p/129653#M18995</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I agree with you 100%. Yes, there was lots of improvements, but even in R81 version, far from perfect.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:27:30 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-09-17T13:27:30Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>fwaccel still not perfect</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/fwaccel-still-not-perfect/m-p/129618#M18986</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I am having certain difficulty in working with fwaccel that I want to share with you &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I have a shell scripts that will run many fwaccel commands one after another. This used to work very well until someone decided it is more fun to brake in a recent R80.40 JHF and now this is what happens:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;ERROR: Another fwaccel command is already in progress.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Please wait until that command finishes.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;ERROR: Another fwaccel command is already in progress.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Please wait until that command finishes.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;ERROR: Another fwaccel command is already in progress.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Please wait until that command finishes.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;And I either have to go and as a monkey put 'sleep 2' after each command or be a lazy guy and re-work batch files to use loops.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Was it so difficult to use FIFO queue and not reject command but rather spool/delay it I don't know... ?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Then, someone from CP promised me like a year ago to fix this and it is still not fixed&amp;nbsp;&lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":face_with_tears_of_joy:"&gt;😂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 0/18446744073709551613 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 0/2 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 1/18446744073709551609 (&lt;FONT color="#FF0000"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;-14%&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;) &amp;lt;-- !?!???!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;-R80.40 latest GA JHF&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2021 05:39:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/fwaccel-still-not-perfect/m-p/129618#M18986</guid>
      <dc:creator>HristoGrigorov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-09-17T05:39:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: fwaccel still not perfect</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/fwaccel-still-not-perfect/m-p/129653#M18995</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I agree with you 100%. Yes, there was lots of improvements, but even in R81 version, far from perfect.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:27:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/fwaccel-still-not-perfect/m-p/129653#M18995</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-09-17T13:27:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

