topic Re: KPPAK vs. UPPAK: Slowpath and Fastpath in Firewall and Security Management

KPPAK vs. UPPAK: Slowpath and Fastpath

Timothy_Hall — Sun, 22 Sep 2024 16:25:41 GMT

According to sk32578: SecureXL Mechanism: "When SecureXL works in the User Space (UPPAK) mode, the Security Gateway performance for the Slow Path traffic is lower compared to the Kernel Space (KPPAK) mode."

I've been trying to get my hands on a loaner Lightspeed/9000/19000/29000 appliance to test this for myself, but have been unsuccessful thus far. So I'll go ahead and just ask:

1) What is the rough penalty for F2F/slowpath traffic in UPPAK mode vs. KPPAK? Similar to the penalty for moving from KMFW to USFW?

2) What is the rough penalty for fastpath traffic in UPPAK mode vs. KPPAK?

3) Can I assume that Medium Path performance (which is where the vast majority of traffic ends up on most firewalls) is more efficient in UPPAK vs. KPPAK mode due to not having to cross the kernel boundary as much?

Re: KPPAK vs. UPPAK: Slowpath and Fastpath

PhoneBoy — Mon, 23 Sep 2024 13:39:06 GMT

F2F doesn’t accelerate at all, so I assume the performance impact is similar in either UPPAK and KPPAK mode.

I thought the whole point of fastpath wasn’t a penalty but a benefit 😉 But I get the basic question…and I’ll see what I can find out.

Same with the medium path benefit…though I tend to agree with your assessment it’s likely a little better.

Re: KPPAK vs. UPPAK: Slowpath and Fastpath

PhoneBoy — Mon, 23 Sep 2024 18:55:32 GMT

@shais can you comment on this?