<?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 Fast_Accel on Virtualized Firewalls in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Fast-Accel-on-Virtualized-Firewalls/m-p/239770#M46519</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello everyone,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm working on a network lab environment virtualized on &lt;STRONG&gt;ESXi&lt;/STRONG&gt;, where I have two SGs (sg1 and sg2) connected via a route-based S2S VPN.&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Both firewalls are running R81.20 JHF 76.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="ubuntus.png" style="width: 697px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29453i395F2304D749A76A/image-dimensions/697x101?v=v2" width="697" height="101" role="button" title="ubuntus.png" alt="ubuntus.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I have connectivity between both servers.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="pings u1 a u2.png" style="width: 693px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29454iDCF819DD9474898E/image-dimensions/693x106?v=v2" width="693" height="106" role="button" title="pings u1 a u2.png" alt="pings u1 a u2.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;These are the static routes on sg1 on the left and sg2 on the right.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="rutas estaticas.png" style="width: 644px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29455iCE3C99BAA166D39B/image-dimensions/644x45?v=v2" width="644" height="45" role="button" title="rutas estaticas.png" alt="rutas estaticas.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;One of the goals of the lab is to test the &lt;STRONG&gt;fast_accel&lt;/STRONG&gt; feature. According to the official documentation, this feature should be effective for connections accelerated by &lt;STRONG&gt;SecureXL&lt;/STRONG&gt;, and the connections should appear in the &lt;STRONG&gt;fwaccel conns&lt;/STRONG&gt; command.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="fwaccel  conns.png" style="width: 632px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29456iD980EB6ED68DF948/image-dimensions/632x362?v=v2" width="632" height="362" role="button" title="fwaccel  conns.png" alt="fwaccel  conns.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;To test this, I have created two rules with &lt;STRONG&gt;fast_accel&lt;/STRONG&gt; on both firewalls (sg1 and sg2), as my research suggests that this should be sufficient for the rules to match the traffic between &lt;STRONG&gt;ubuntu1&lt;/STRONG&gt; and &lt;STRONG&gt;ubuntu2&lt;/STRONG&gt;.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;"I created the rules with the following commands on both firewalls:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;fw ctl fast_accel add 192.168.22.20 192.168.21.20 any any&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;fw ctl fast_accel add 192.168.21.20 192.168.22.20 any any&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, even though I'm generating traffic between the two servers using &lt;STRONG&gt;iperf3&lt;/STRONG&gt;, I don't see any hits on the accelerated connections.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="hits.png" style="width: 541px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29457i13FC5E04B586878E/image-dimensions/541x273?v=v2" width="541" height="273" role="button" title="hits.png" alt="hits.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="iperf.png" style="width: 788px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29458i3AD39CF8C011EBBC/image-dimensions/788x258?v=v2" width="788" height="258" role="button" title="iperf.png" alt="iperf.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can anyone provide guidance on what might be going wrong or if there's something additional I need to configure for the &lt;STRONG&gt;fast_accel&lt;/STRONG&gt; rules to be applied correctly?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 02:29:30 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>jennyado</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-01-28T02:29:30Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Fast_Accel on Virtualized Firewalls</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Fast-Accel-on-Virtualized-Firewalls/m-p/239770#M46519</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello everyone,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm working on a network lab environment virtualized on &lt;STRONG&gt;ESXi&lt;/STRONG&gt;, where I have two SGs (sg1 and sg2) connected via a route-based S2S VPN.&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Both firewalls are running R81.20 JHF 76.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="ubuntus.png" style="width: 697px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29453i395F2304D749A76A/image-dimensions/697x101?v=v2" width="697" height="101" role="button" title="ubuntus.png" alt="ubuntus.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I have connectivity between both servers.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="pings u1 a u2.png" style="width: 693px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29454iDCF819DD9474898E/image-dimensions/693x106?v=v2" width="693" height="106" role="button" title="pings u1 a u2.png" alt="pings u1 a u2.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;These are the static routes on sg1 on the left and sg2 on the right.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="rutas estaticas.png" style="width: 644px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29455iCE3C99BAA166D39B/image-dimensions/644x45?v=v2" width="644" height="45" role="button" title="rutas estaticas.png" alt="rutas estaticas.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;One of the goals of the lab is to test the &lt;STRONG&gt;fast_accel&lt;/STRONG&gt; feature. According to the official documentation, this feature should be effective for connections accelerated by &lt;STRONG&gt;SecureXL&lt;/STRONG&gt;, and the connections should appear in the &lt;STRONG&gt;fwaccel conns&lt;/STRONG&gt; command.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="fwaccel  conns.png" style="width: 632px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29456iD980EB6ED68DF948/image-dimensions/632x362?v=v2" width="632" height="362" role="button" title="fwaccel  conns.png" alt="fwaccel  conns.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;To test this, I have created two rules with &lt;STRONG&gt;fast_accel&lt;/STRONG&gt; on both firewalls (sg1 and sg2), as my research suggests that this should be sufficient for the rules to match the traffic between &lt;STRONG&gt;ubuntu1&lt;/STRONG&gt; and &lt;STRONG&gt;ubuntu2&lt;/STRONG&gt;.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp;"I created the rules with the following commands on both firewalls:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;fw ctl fast_accel add 192.168.22.20 192.168.21.20 any any&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;fw ctl fast_accel add 192.168.21.20 192.168.22.20 any any&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, even though I'm generating traffic between the two servers using &lt;STRONG&gt;iperf3&lt;/STRONG&gt;, I don't see any hits on the accelerated connections.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="hits.png" style="width: 541px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29457i13FC5E04B586878E/image-dimensions/541x273?v=v2" width="541" height="273" role="button" title="hits.png" alt="hits.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="iperf.png" style="width: 788px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29458i3AD39CF8C011EBBC/image-dimensions/788x258?v=v2" width="788" height="258" role="button" title="iperf.png" alt="iperf.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can anyone provide guidance on what might be going wrong or if there's something additional I need to configure for the &lt;STRONG&gt;fast_accel&lt;/STRONG&gt; rules to be applied correctly?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 02:29:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Fast-Accel-on-Virtualized-Firewalls/m-p/239770#M46519</guid>
      <dc:creator>jennyado</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-01-28T02:29:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Fast_Accel on Virtualized Firewalls</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Fast-Accel-on-Virtualized-Firewalls/m-p/239772#M46520</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Whether the gateway is virtualized or on "bare-metal" non-virtualized hardware will not affect how fast_accel operates.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Based on your &lt;STRONG&gt;fwaccel conns&lt;/STRONG&gt; outputs the connection is already in the fastpath because the "S" flag (streaming) is not present.&amp;nbsp; If the connection was F2F/slowpath it would not show up in the output of &lt;STRONG&gt;fwaccel conns&lt;/STRONG&gt; at all.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Because the connection would have been offloaded to the fastpath regardless of your fast_accel rule, the hit count is not incremented.&amp;nbsp; If the connection was originally destined for the Medium Path but the fast_accel rule had forced it into the fastpath, then the hit count would have been incremented and you would see an "F" flag for your connection in &lt;STRONG&gt;fwaccel conns&lt;/STRONG&gt;.&amp;nbsp; See&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk180496" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;sk180496: No match on SecureXL Fast Accelerator (fw fast_accel).&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;F2F/slowpath connections cannot be forced into the fastpath by fast_accel.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;All this and much more is covered in my &lt;A href="http://www.maxpowerfirewalls.com/gw-optimization-course.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;Gateway Performance Optimization&lt;/A&gt; course; you can preview the Table of Contents for free and this topic was covered on pages 149-151.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 13:30:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Fast-Accel-on-Virtualized-Firewalls/m-p/239772#M46520</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-01-28T13:30:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

