<?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 Performance Questions Quantum 9300 - SNMP Fast Accel &amp;amp; UDP: Check Point. in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Performance-Questions-Quantum-9300-SNMP-Fast-Accel-amp-UDP-Check/m-p/247302#M48288</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello all!&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;We migrated to a 9300 some time ago.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Unfortunately we have seen quite some performance issues compared to our old firewall.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I know RAD &amp;amp; UPPAK has general issues, but RAD has received a workaround (autodebug).&lt;BR /&gt;We also switched to KPPAK for (maybe) more performance, but overall much better stability.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are continously checking CPVIEW for performance issues.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Today we saw that the firewall was overally loaded at 50 % with about 1.3 Gbit of throughput (which is quite extreme if you ask me).&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I then noticed that in their ordered application layer, the clean up rule, was defined with source any and destination any.&lt;BR /&gt;Changed this to destination Internet, this alleviated a lot of load on the FW, and from my understanding, is also best practice.&lt;BR /&gt;Did this since I saw a lot of application control was applied to internal traffic, maybe needlessly.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So atm the firewall is loaded 28-50 % depending on spikes &amp;amp; load.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I do have two questions.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;We have a few SNMP Servers that send out MASSIVE quantities of SNMP queries, which we can see under CPVIEW -&amp;gt; CPU -&amp;gt; Top Connections.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;They can reach as high as 10% + performance hit when they start.&lt;BR /&gt;I have tried adding these sessions to fw ctl fast_accel, but I don't seem to get a match at all.&lt;BR /&gt;Maybe I need to reset the connections or fail-over to the other FW?&lt;BR /&gt;I suspect that it keeps all the SNMP sessions as active, which it then applies the "old" way of doing it, with the Appl Control &amp;amp; URLF and without fast_accel.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Any input here?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Also, when checking CPVIEW -&amp;gt; CPU -&amp;gt; Top Connections, I can see UDP: Check Point being at 3 - 8 % Total CPU Consumption consistently.&lt;BR /&gt;Checking another firewall, it's barely at 0,01 % (barely shows up in top connections).&lt;BR /&gt;What can be done about this? Is this normal / expected?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I do believe 8 % of the total firewall performance going to UDP: Check Point sounds excessive though.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 11:06:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Henrik_J</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-04-25T11:06:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Performance Questions Quantum 9300 - SNMP Fast Accel &amp; UDP: Check Point.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Performance-Questions-Quantum-9300-SNMP-Fast-Accel-amp-UDP-Check/m-p/247302#M48288</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello all!&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;We migrated to a 9300 some time ago.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Unfortunately we have seen quite some performance issues compared to our old firewall.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I know RAD &amp;amp; UPPAK has general issues, but RAD has received a workaround (autodebug).&lt;BR /&gt;We also switched to KPPAK for (maybe) more performance, but overall much better stability.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are continously checking CPVIEW for performance issues.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Today we saw that the firewall was overally loaded at 50 % with about 1.3 Gbit of throughput (which is quite extreme if you ask me).&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I then noticed that in their ordered application layer, the clean up rule, was defined with source any and destination any.&lt;BR /&gt;Changed this to destination Internet, this alleviated a lot of load on the FW, and from my understanding, is also best practice.&lt;BR /&gt;Did this since I saw a lot of application control was applied to internal traffic, maybe needlessly.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So atm the firewall is loaded 28-50 % depending on spikes &amp;amp; load.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I do have two questions.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;We have a few SNMP Servers that send out MASSIVE quantities of SNMP queries, which we can see under CPVIEW -&amp;gt; CPU -&amp;gt; Top Connections.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;They can reach as high as 10% + performance hit when they start.&lt;BR /&gt;I have tried adding these sessions to fw ctl fast_accel, but I don't seem to get a match at all.&lt;BR /&gt;Maybe I need to reset the connections or fail-over to the other FW?&lt;BR /&gt;I suspect that it keeps all the SNMP sessions as active, which it then applies the "old" way of doing it, with the Appl Control &amp;amp; URLF and without fast_accel.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Any input here?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Also, when checking CPVIEW -&amp;gt; CPU -&amp;gt; Top Connections, I can see UDP: Check Point being at 3 - 8 % Total CPU Consumption consistently.&lt;BR /&gt;Checking another firewall, it's barely at 0,01 % (barely shows up in top connections).&lt;BR /&gt;What can be done about this? Is this normal / expected?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I do believe 8 % of the total firewall performance going to UDP: Check Point sounds excessive though.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 11:06:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Performance-Questions-Quantum-9300-SNMP-Fast-Accel-amp-UDP-Check/m-p/247302#M48288</guid>
      <dc:creator>Henrik_J</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-04-25T11:06:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance Questions Quantum 9300 - SNMP Fast Accel &amp; UDP: Check Point.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Performance-Questions-Quantum-9300-SNMP-Fast-Accel-amp-UDP-Check/m-p/247306#M48290</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;What appliance model was used before and which&amp;nbsp;snmp object is referenced in the policy out of interest?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Please also share the version/JHF info for our context.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:27:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Performance-Questions-Quantum-9300-SNMP-Fast-Accel-amp-UDP-Check/m-p/247306#M48290</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-04-25T12:27:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Performance Questions Quantum 9300 - SNMP Fast Accel &amp; UDP: Check Point.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Performance-Questions-Quantum-9300-SNMP-Fast-Accel-amp-UDP-Check/m-p/247308#M48292</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;They had a 23500 before.&lt;BR /&gt;I know it's a huge difference in CPU Core count, but the 23500 was barely used (10-15 % ish max).&lt;BR /&gt;I assume they got it super discounted.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The datasheets besides the Core Count is very similar except the Threat Prevention where it's 11 -&amp;gt; 9 Gbps.&lt;BR /&gt;The 9300 is stronger in everything else if you are to believe in datasheet though.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;But we basically went from 10-15 % consumption to 50 %+, so something doesn't add up here at all.&lt;BR /&gt;I know you cannot compare datasheet &amp;amp; datasheet "normally", especially if it's between vendors.&lt;BR /&gt;But here it's the same vendor.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;They are using the built-in service which has the Protocol handler defined.&lt;BR /&gt;Namely snmp-read.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Maybe we could change that to a replacement service udp_161 ?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 11:37:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Performance-Questions-Quantum-9300-SNMP-Fast-Accel-amp-UDP-Check/m-p/247308#M48292</guid>
      <dc:creator>Henrik_J</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-04-25T11:37:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

