<?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: High cpu utilization VSX in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/103011#M9002</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Yikes, definitely not Threat Prevention driving the high F2F.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Is there any Remote Access VPN traffic on this gateway?&amp;nbsp; That traffic will have to go F2F much of the time so it can be handled in process space by vpnd, for Visitor Mode handling and such.&amp;nbsp; There were some recent optimizations for Remote Access VPN introduced which are not present in your code level, see here:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="cp_link sc_ellipsis" href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk168297&amp;amp;partition=Advanced&amp;amp;product=IPSec" target="_blank"&gt;sk168297: Large scale support in VPN Remote Access Visitor-Mode&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="cp_link sc_ellipsis" href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk167506&amp;amp;partition=Advanced&amp;amp;product=Endpoint" target="_blank"&gt;sk167506: High number of &lt;STRONG&gt;Visitor&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;Mode&lt;/STRONG&gt; users in CPView or in output of "vpn show_tcpt" command&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Beyond that you'll need to engage with TAC to have them run a debug to determine why so much traffic is winding up F2F.&amp;nbsp; That debug can be a bit dangerous and is best pursued with TAC.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:10:22 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-11-23T15:10:22Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/89497#M8988</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;DIV class="mceNonEditable lia-copypaste-placeholder"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="tlid-translation translation"&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;We are detecting high CPU usage in the virtual firewalls that we have. How can I know what is causing it?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="tlid-translation translation"&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;The firewall when you execute the command "top", indicates that the PID 14995 - COMMAND - fwk5_dev, has a CPU% above 100.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="tlid-translation translation"&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;In snmp v3 monitoring, I get the High CPU alert. Checking indicates that CPU # 768 is the one with this behavior. (this is indicated by the spectrum tool)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;=================================================================== &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;top - 17:15:10 up 17 days, 5:08, 1 user, load average: 4.17, 4.55, 3.99&lt;BR /&gt;Tasks: 502 total, 4 running, 498 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie&lt;BR /&gt;Cpu(s): 11.3%us, 2.9%sy, 0.0%ni, 79.2%id, 0.0%wa, 0.1%hi, 6.4%si, 0.0%st&lt;BR /&gt;Mem: 32779220k total, 32229544k used, 549676k free, 903992k buffers&lt;BR /&gt;Swap: 18892344k total, 260k used, 18892084k free, 20568592k cached&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;PID&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; USER&amp;nbsp; PR&amp;nbsp; NI&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; VIRT&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; RES&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; SHR S&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; %CPU&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; %MEM TIME+ COMMAND&lt;BR /&gt;14995 admin 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; -20&amp;nbsp; 860m&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 250m 64m S&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 112&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0.8 267:59.91 fwk5_dev&lt;BR /&gt;15117 admin 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; -20&amp;nbsp; 1241m&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 633m 85m S&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 37&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 2.0 4296:42 fwk3_dev&lt;BR /&gt;18274 admin 15&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 735m&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 204m 40m S&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 35&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0.6 36:59.04 fw_full&lt;BR /&gt;14902 admin 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; -20&amp;nbsp; 1105m&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 496m 84m S&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 15&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 1.6 3562:06 fwk13_dev&lt;BR /&gt;19721 admin 15&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; R&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 15&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 0.0 508:07.98 cphwd_q_init_ke&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;===================================================================&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="tlid-translation translation"&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;I have 16 CPUs, how to know which one is using the largest CPU?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;How do I interpret the output of the CPVIEW that identifies two with high cpu.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="high_cpu_vsx_1.png" style="width: 573px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/6949i62C3C31BB8EBFC6C/image-dimensions/573x352?v=v2" width="573" height="352" role="button" title="high_cpu_vsx_1.png" alt="high_cpu_vsx_1.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2020 23:00:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/89497#M8988</guid>
      <dc:creator>raquinog</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-22T23:00:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/89510#M8989</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi &lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/35389"&gt;@raquinog&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Can you send some more screenshots:&lt;BR /&gt;# fw ctl affinity -l -a&lt;BR /&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;# top (press 1 to show cors)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;More can be seen in the output of the CLI commands.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I think you do a lot of content inspection. So the PSLXL path will probably be very busy.&lt;BR /&gt;If this is the case you can adjust the affinity if necessary.&lt;BR /&gt;---&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;A small calculation sample for the utilization of process fwkX:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="vsx5.JPG" style="width: 706px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/6951iE7DDD777FEB69E8B/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="vsx5.JPG" alt="vsx5.JPG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;- fwk0_X -&amp;gt; fw instance thread that takes care for the packet processing&lt;BR /&gt;- fwk0_dev_X -&amp;gt; the thread that takes care for communication between fw instances and other CP daemons &lt;BR /&gt;- fwk0_kissd -&amp;gt; legacy Kernel Infrastructure (obsolete)&lt;BR /&gt;- fwk0_hp -&amp;gt; (high priority) cluster thread&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2020 06:01:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/89510#M8989</guid>
      <dc:creator>HeikoAnkenbrand</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-23T06:01:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/89960#M8990</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Use:&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;ps -aux&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2020 06:50:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/89960#M8990</guid>
      <dc:creator>balder_skoeld</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-27T06:50:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/101393#M8991</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have a similar issue.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a pair of 15600 appliances (32 total cores with dynamic dispatcher on), on this I have&amp;nbsp; 6 Virtual Systems, out of which three are busy.&amp;nbsp; One of these has over 250,000 concurrent connections (has peaked around 350,000) and I've allocated 8 cores to it (VS1).&amp;nbsp; This VS runs FW/IPS/AV/ABOT.&amp;nbsp; The other two are high volume low connections so these currently hit about 1Gbps but has about 40,000 concurrent connections (It should be noted that normally these would be much busier).&amp;nbsp; I've allocated 6 cores each (VS2 - 3).&amp;nbsp; These are running FW/IPS/AV/ABOT/URL Filtering/Application Control; using top&amp;nbsp; I can see the fwk process for each fo the VS runs around 150%, clear other processes are getting hit.&amp;nbsp; The question is what and why considering these devices should be able to handle much more load.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The gateways are running R80.20 with JHFA183.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The current core breakdown is this:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS1 = 8 cores&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS2 = 6 cores&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS3 = 6 cores&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS4 = 2 cores&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS5 = 1 core&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS6 = 1 core&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm going to assume 6 for SND multi-queue&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When everything is running on a single node we have seen latency issue and packet drops on VS2 - 3.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Using out monitoring tools I can only see all the CPU cores which indicates about 50 - 55% usage per core (of course there would be spike).&amp;nbsp; I would like to know a couple of things.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1. Can we over subscribe core allocation?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. How on earth can we actually monitor the correct number of cores per VS using SNMP tool such as solarwinds or PRTG.&amp;nbsp; I've looked at the documentation and it pretty much does not work for CPU monitoring (yes I can get everything else correctly by polling the VS's themselves).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2020 22:17:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/101393#M8991</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-07T22:17:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/101406#M8992</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;1: Yes you can oversubscribe, I would also run VSLS so you can use both boxes.&lt;BR /&gt;If you really want you can run the boxes at 100% load on both of them &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I wouldn´t recommend it. But its possible, its more or less how much pain do you want to have in a hardware failure or during upgrades.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just a comment regarding the 150% load, that means its using 1.5 Instanses.&lt;BR /&gt;If you allocate 8 instanses meaning your 100% load is 800%&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2: monitoring VS actual load isn´t possible, it gives incorrect values.&lt;BR /&gt;The values given by the SNMP for CPU is NOT per VS, but for the box or for a specific core.&lt;BR /&gt;Had a long case with check point R&amp;amp;D regarding this, not sure if/when its going to be fixed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;Magnus&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2020 08:03:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/101406#M8992</guid>
      <dc:creator>Magnus-Holmberg</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-08T08:03:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/101434#M8993</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;1: Yes you can oversubscribe, I would also run VSLS so you can use both boxes.&lt;BR /&gt;- Great, that's what I suspected, clearly oversubscription needs to be sensible. One of my biggest issues is the ability for Solarwinds/PRTG to report the actually CPU usage per VS, which does not work (Just picks up 32 cores per VS)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just a comment regarding the 150% load, that means its using 1.5 Instances.&lt;BR /&gt;If you allocate 8 instances meaning your 100% load is 800%&lt;BR /&gt;- Exactly hence when I hit 150% for VS2 (example which has 6 cores) I'm not even using 40% of the total cores available hence cannot see why I would hit latency or packet loss issues.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2: monitoring VS actual load isn´t possible, it gives incorrect values.&lt;BR /&gt;The values given by the SNMP for CPU is NOT per VS, but for the box or for a specific core.&lt;BR /&gt;Had a long case with check point R&amp;amp;D regarding this, not sure if/when its going to be fixed.&lt;BR /&gt;- Thankyou for feeling my pain! Checkpoint please listen and help resolve this. I appreciate this may be a challenge considering dynamic dispatching. I can only see this working if manual affinity was used in this way the same cores would be used.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Do we know if there has been an improvement in this area for R81?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2020 18:40:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/101434#M8993</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-08T18:40:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/101438#M8994</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Btw are you using MultiQ on your interfaces, so its not the cores assigned to the NIC that is going bananas?&lt;BR /&gt;Have had that issue before when i didn´t realize a box we took over didn´t have nics supporting multiQ (open server)&lt;BR /&gt;As we didn´t trust the SNMP monitoring on CPUs so we first notice it when the delay did go up and affected traffic.&lt;BR /&gt;On a 10G nic without MultiQ peak would be arround 3.5 -&amp;gt; 4 Gbit in total.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2020 20:11:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/101438#M8994</guid>
      <dc:creator>Magnus-Holmberg</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-08T20:11:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102794#M8995</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We are running multi-queue but the processors seems ok for this:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Mgmt: CPU 0&lt;BR /&gt;Sync: CPU 16&lt;BR /&gt;eth1-07: CPU 17&lt;BR /&gt;eth1-08: CPU 17&lt;BR /&gt;VS_0 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_1 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_2 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_3 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_4 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_5 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_6 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_7 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_8 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_9 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;VS_10 fwk: CPU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31&lt;BR /&gt;Interface eth3-01: has multi queue enabled&lt;BR /&gt;Interface eth3-02: has multi queue enabled&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# cpmq get -v&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Active ixgbe interfaces:&lt;BR /&gt;eth3-01 [On]&lt;BR /&gt;eth3-02 [On]&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Active igb interfaces:&lt;BR /&gt;Mgmt [Off]&lt;BR /&gt;Sync [Off]&lt;BR /&gt;eth1-04 [Off]&lt;BR /&gt;eth1-07 [Off]&lt;BR /&gt;eth1-08 [Off]&lt;BR /&gt;eth2-08 [Off]&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The rx_num for ixgbe is: 4 (default)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;multi-queue affinity for ixgbe interfaces:&lt;BR /&gt;CPU | TX | Vector | RX Bytes&lt;BR /&gt;-------------------------------------------------------------&lt;BR /&gt;0 | 0 | eth3-01-TxRx-0 (83) | 4630323900886&lt;BR /&gt;| | eth3-02-TxRx-0 (131) |&lt;BR /&gt;1 | 2 | eth3-01-TxRx-2 (99) | 4837081863067&lt;BR /&gt;| | eth3-02-TxRx-2 (147) |&lt;BR /&gt;2 | 4 | |&lt;BR /&gt;3 | 6 | |&lt;BR /&gt;4 | 8 | |&lt;BR /&gt;5 | 10 | |&lt;BR /&gt;6 | 12 | |&lt;BR /&gt;7 | 14 | |&lt;BR /&gt;8 | 16 | |&lt;BR /&gt;9 | 18 | |&lt;BR /&gt;10 | 20 | |&lt;BR /&gt;11 | 22 | |&lt;BR /&gt;12 | 24 | |&lt;BR /&gt;13 | 26 | |&lt;BR /&gt;14 | 28 | |&lt;BR /&gt;15 | 30 | |&lt;BR /&gt;16 | 1 | eth3-01-TxRx-1 (91) | 4964000363908&lt;BR /&gt;| | eth3-02-TxRx-1 (139) |&lt;BR /&gt;17 | 3 | eth3-01-TxRx-3 (107) | 4768026041847&lt;BR /&gt;| | eth3-02-TxRx-3 (155) |&lt;BR /&gt;18 | 5 | |&lt;BR /&gt;19 | 7 | |&lt;BR /&gt;20 | 9 | |&lt;BR /&gt;21 | 11 | |&lt;BR /&gt;22 | 13 | |&lt;BR /&gt;23 | 15 | |&lt;BR /&gt;24 | 17 | |&lt;BR /&gt;25 | 19 | |&lt;BR /&gt;26 | 21 | |&lt;BR /&gt;27 | 23 | |&lt;BR /&gt;28 | 25 | |&lt;BR /&gt;29 | 27 | |&lt;BR /&gt;30 | 29 | |&lt;BR /&gt;31 | 31 | |&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;TAC&amp;nbsp; jumped on to have a look at the optimization which they was good, but something is not adding up.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I went to the cpsizeme tool on the Checkpoint site, said I wanted 5Gbps and was running 10VS with Gen V TP (exclude TE/TX), this basically said I should have 95% grown.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm running probably 3Gbps&amp;nbsp; with the following blades turned on&amp;nbsp;fw urlf av appi ips anti_bot mon and my overall CPUs when everything runs on one node is above 60%&amp;nbsp; I've now split this across the 15600s to reduce impact to service however the numbers are not adding up.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Here fwaccel output from all the VSs:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Node1:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS5:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 16/228876 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 59546699579/60324119190 (98%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 777419611/60324119190 (1%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 1465272077/60324119190 (2%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/60324119190 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 59456751619/60324119190 (98%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPAS inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/60324119190 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSL inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/60324119190 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/60324119190 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/60324119190 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/60324119190 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fw ctl multik stat&lt;BR /&gt;ID | Active | CPU | Connections | Peak&lt;BR /&gt;----------------------------------------------&lt;BR /&gt;0 | Yes | 2-15+ | 29806 | 39089&lt;BR /&gt;1 | Yes | 2-15+ | 31863 | 38537&lt;BR /&gt;2 | Yes | 2-15+ | 21908 | 37993&lt;BR /&gt;3 | Yes | 2-15+ | 32414 | 38856&lt;BR /&gt;4 | Yes | 2-15+ | 31566 | 37112&lt;BR /&gt;5 | Yes | 2-15+ | 31386 | 39640&lt;BR /&gt;6 | Yes | 2-15+ | 31160 | 38202&lt;BR /&gt;7 | Yes | 2-15+ | 30519 | 38076&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS6:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 1463/12117 (12%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 8982729259/9018937348 (99%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 36208089/9018937348 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 87959368/9018937348 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/9018937348 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 8836491935/9018937348 (97%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPAS inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/9018937348 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSL inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/9018937348 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/9018937348 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/9018937348 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/9018937348 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;]# fw ctl multik stat&lt;BR /&gt;ID | Active | CPU | Connections | Peak&lt;BR /&gt;----------------------------------------------&lt;BR /&gt;0 | Yes | 2-15+ | 6669 | 9765&lt;BR /&gt;1 | Yes | 2-15+ | 5513 | 9201&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS7:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 0/1410 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 2045822488/2049716107 (99%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 3893619/2049716107 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 5894107/2049716107 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/2049716107 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 2042983760/2049716107 (99%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPAS inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/2049716107 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSL inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/2049716107 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/2049716107 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/2049716107 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/2049716107 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fw ctl multik stat&lt;BR /&gt;CoreXL is disabled&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Node2:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS8 (I can on this one F2F percentage, this one has site-to-site VPNs):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 0/0 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 6542264/38410121 (17%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 31867857/38410121 (82%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 591/38410121 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/38410121 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 1138908/38410121 (2%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPAS inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/38410121 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSL inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/38410121 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/38410121 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/38410121 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/38410121 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fw ctl multik stat&lt;BR /&gt;ID | Active | CPU | Connections | Peak&lt;BR /&gt;----------------------------------------------&lt;BR /&gt;0 | Yes | 2-15+ | 117 | 5210&lt;BR /&gt;1 | Yes | 2-15+ | 111 | 6037&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS9:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 22/33167 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 6362020813/6397033174 (99%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 35012361/6397033174 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 219158034/6397033174 (3%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/6397033174 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 6122277162/6397033174 (95%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPAS inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/6397033174 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSL inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/6397033174 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/6397033174 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/6397033174 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/6397033174 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fw ctl multik stat&lt;BR /&gt;ID | Active | CPU | Connections | Peak&lt;BR /&gt;----------------------------------------------&lt;BR /&gt;0 | Yes | 2-15+ | 3816 | 13537&lt;BR /&gt;1 | Yes | 2-15+ | 3993 | 7176&lt;BR /&gt;2 | Yes | 2-15+ | 3742 | 8666&lt;BR /&gt;3 | Yes | 2-15+ | 4201 | 7778&lt;BR /&gt;4 | Yes | 2-15+ | 3947 | 7443&lt;BR /&gt;5 | Yes | 2-15+ | 3931 | 7500&lt;BR /&gt;6 | Yes | 2-15+ | 3949 | 7052&lt;BR /&gt;7 | Yes | 2-15+ | 3964 | 6830&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS10:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 252/31621 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 6743652274/6772265207 (99%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 28612933/6772265207 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 273241968/6772265207 (4%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/6772265207 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 6711806652/6772265207 (99%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPAS inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/6772265207 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSL inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/6772265207 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/6772265207 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/6772265207 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/6772265207 (0%&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;# fw ctl multik stat&lt;BR /&gt;ID | Active | CPU | Connections | Peak&lt;BR /&gt;----------------------------------------------&lt;BR /&gt;0 | Yes | 2-15+ | 4326 | 5910&lt;BR /&gt;1 | Yes | 2-15+ | 4488 | 6212&lt;BR /&gt;2 | Yes | 2-15+ | 4372 | 7937&lt;BR /&gt;3 | Yes | 2-15+ | 4399 | 6425&lt;BR /&gt;4 | Yes | 2-15+ | 4422 | 6094&lt;BR /&gt;5 | Yes | 2-15+ | 4379 | 5975&lt;BR /&gt;6 | Yes | 2-15+ | 4269 | 6043&lt;BR /&gt;7 | Yes | 2-15+ | 4419 | 5877&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2020 15:09:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102794#M8995</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-20T15:09:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102803#M8996</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;According to CP TAC After "top" command. Do Shift+H to get true cp usage.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2020 16:18:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102803#M8996</guid>
      <dc:creator>CPRQ</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-20T16:18:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102806#M8997</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND&lt;BR /&gt;20100 admin 18 0 276m 171m 23m R 99 0.3 6994:27 rad_resp_slow_1&lt;BR /&gt;20099 admin 18 0 276m 171m 23m R 99 0.3 6991:47 rad_resp_slow_0&lt;BR /&gt;20101 admin 18 0 276m 171m 23m R 98 0.3 6770:31 rad_resp_slow_2&lt;BR /&gt;326 admin 0 -20 5141m 4.4g 547m R 58 7.0 4574:45 fwk5_2&lt;BR /&gt;325 admin 0 -20 5141m 4.4g 547m S 55 7.0 4161:26 fwk5_1&lt;BR /&gt;329 admin 0 -20 5141m 4.4g 547m S 54 7.0 4348:47 fwk5_5&lt;BR /&gt;328 admin 0 -20 5141m 4.4g 547m R 53 7.0 4300:13 fwk5_4&lt;BR /&gt;331 admin 0 -20 5141m 4.4g 547m R 53 7.0 3985:35 fwk5_7&lt;BR /&gt;330 admin 0 -20 5141m 4.4g 547m R 52 7.0 4018:28 fwk5_6&lt;BR /&gt;327 admin 0 -20 5141m 4.4g 547m R 51 7.0 4433:13 fwk5_3&lt;BR /&gt;324 admin 0 -20 5141m 4.4g 547m S 49 7.0 3919:58 fwk5_0&lt;BR /&gt;31349 admin 0 -20 1093m 575m 196m S 17 0.9 1295:48 fwk7_0&lt;BR /&gt;32255 admin 0 -20 1505m 926m 249m S 15 1.4 3326:08 fwk6_0&lt;BR /&gt;32256 admin 0 -20 1505m 926m 249m S 14 1.4 3458:54 fwk6_1&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2020 16:28:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102806#M8997</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-20T16:28:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102895#M8998</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;VS8 (I can on this one F2F percentage, this one has site-to-site VPNs):&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;# fwaccel stats -s&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 0/0 (0%)&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 6542264/38410121 (17%)&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;FONT color="#FF0000"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 31867857/38410121 (82%)&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;That F2F percentage is way too high, what other blades do you have enabled in that VS other than IPSec VPN?&amp;nbsp; &lt;STRONG&gt;vsenv 8;enabled_blades&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Any chance you are using SHA-384 for your VPNs?&amp;nbsp; Depending on your code version doing so can keep VPN traffic from getting accelerated by SecureXL and force it F2F.&amp;nbsp; Also make sure you haven't accidentally enabled Wire Mode unless you need it for route-based VPNs.&amp;nbsp; See here:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95704" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95704&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2020 14:26:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102895#M8998</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-22T14:26:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102907#M8999</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;VS5:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;fw av ips anti_bot mon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS6:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;fw urlf av appi ips anti_bot content_awareness mon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS7:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;fw vpn urlf av appi ips anti_bot mon vpn (Very strange output lists vpn twice?)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS8:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;fw vpn urlf av appi ips anti_bot mon vpn&amp;nbsp;(Very strange output lists vpn twice?)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS9:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;fw urlf av appi ips anti_bot mon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VS10:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;fw urlf av appi ips anti_bot mon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- Wire mode not enabled (was considering enabling this for Internal Site-to-Sites)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- Where not using SHA384, but we are using SHA256 and DH group 19 for some of the VPNs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 09:04:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102907#M8999</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-23T09:04:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102988#M9000</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;For VS8 try this from expert mode, note that this will temporarily disable Threat Prevention, use at your own risk:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;vsenv 8&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;ips off&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;fw amw unload&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;fwaccel stats -r&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;(wait 2 minutes)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;fwaccel stats -s&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;ips on&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;fw amw fetch local&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Did the F2F % temporarily go way down as a result of this test?&amp;nbsp; If so you have some tuning to do in Threat Prevention.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 13:49:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102988#M9000</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-23T13:49:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102994#M9001</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;8]# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 1/13 (7%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 30060710/180653501 (16%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 150592791/180653501 (83%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 3380/180653501 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/180653501 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 22900827/180653501 (12%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPAS inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/180653501 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSL inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/180653501 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/180653501 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/180653501 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/180653501 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;8]# ips off&lt;BR /&gt;IPS is disabled&lt;BR /&gt;Please note that for the configuration to apply for connections from existing templates, you have to run this command with -n flag which deletes existing templates.&lt;BR /&gt;Without '-n', it will fully take effect in a few minutes.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;8]# fw amw unload&lt;BR /&gt;Unloading Threat Prevention policy&lt;BR /&gt;Unloading Threat Prevention policy succeeded&lt;BR /&gt;8]# fwaccel stats -r&lt;BR /&gt;(Waited about 4 mins)&lt;BR /&gt;8]# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 0/1 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 792/11953 (6%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 11161/11953 (93%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 2/11953 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/11953 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 772/11953 (6%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPAS inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/11953 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSL inline pkts/Total pkts : 0/11953 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/11953 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/11953 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/11953 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 14:04:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/102994#M9001</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-23T14:04:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/103011#M9002</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yikes, definitely not Threat Prevention driving the high F2F.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Is there any Remote Access VPN traffic on this gateway?&amp;nbsp; That traffic will have to go F2F much of the time so it can be handled in process space by vpnd, for Visitor Mode handling and such.&amp;nbsp; There were some recent optimizations for Remote Access VPN introduced which are not present in your code level, see here:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="cp_link sc_ellipsis" href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk168297&amp;amp;partition=Advanced&amp;amp;product=IPSec" target="_blank"&gt;sk168297: Large scale support in VPN Remote Access Visitor-Mode&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="cp_link sc_ellipsis" href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk167506&amp;amp;partition=Advanced&amp;amp;product=Endpoint" target="_blank"&gt;sk167506: High number of &lt;STRONG&gt;Visitor&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;STRONG&gt;Mode&lt;/STRONG&gt; users in CPView or in output of "vpn show_tcpt" command&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Beyond that you'll need to engage with TAC to have them run a debug to determine why so much traffic is winding up F2F.&amp;nbsp; That debug can be a bit dangerous and is best pursued with TAC.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:10:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/103011#M9002</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-23T15:10:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/103012#M9003</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We have no Client to Site VPNs on this, but certainly we do have Site-to-Site VPN to non managed GWs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks Tim - do already have a TAC case raised and cpinfos for all the VSs sent over on Friday (no responses yet - but I suspect R&amp;amp;D are going to get involved).&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:13:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/103012#M9003</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-23T15:13:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/103014#M9004</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;OK great, please post what they eventually find out.&amp;nbsp; Hopefully this thread will help them rule out a few things right off the bat.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:15:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/103014#M9004</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-23T15:15:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/103020#M9005</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Will do Tim&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:38:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/103020#M9005</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-23T15:38:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/114121#M15940</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Believe it or not still no closer to resolving my issue, in fact TAC made it worse.&amp;nbsp; What I have done is increased the SNDs from 4 to 6, so I have 26 worker cores.&amp;nbsp; Was then advised to allocate 26 cores on each VS.&amp;nbsp; My CPU utilisation shot up to nearly 80-85%.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I'm struggling to see how a 15600 in VSX mode and most of the NGTP blades can ever reach 4Gbps, let alone 10Gbps as stated on the application sizing guide (and selected VSX with&amp;nbsp; 10 VS).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Logic I would apply is 10Gbps should equal 80% CPU utilisation (estimated), after all why would a vendor size an appliance knowing it needs 100% CPU to reach the top bandwidth rate, which would then make the system unstable.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2021 21:46:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/114121#M15940</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-19T21:46:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High cpu utilization VSX</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/114525#M16021</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I also think Checkpoint should be updating there hardware to include SSL/hardware accelerator chips.&amp;nbsp; We all know 80% or more traffic is encrypted which means https inspection is becoming more and more relevant, however the throughput/price point leaves customer looking at other vendors that have this built in.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Food for thought guys.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2021 22:27:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/High-cpu-utilization-VSX/m-p/114525#M16021</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-03-24T22:27:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

