<?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: SecureXL 100% F2Fed 80.30 in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95782#M18862</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have all of the above Core protections off and all Threat Cloud protections with a performance impact of critical set to inactive as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is there a good rule of thumb to follow in regards to how old a protection should before before marking it as inactive? 5 years, 7 years, etc?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a TAC case open and I will post any debug commands they run.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2020 16:38:27 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Mike_Jensen</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-09-01T16:38:27Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>SecureXL 100% F2Fed 80.30</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95704#M18843</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have a HA cluster of Check Point 15,400's running 80.30 with JHA take 215.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;[Expert@xxxxx]# enabled_blades&lt;BR /&gt;fw vpn ips identityServer vpn&lt;BR /&gt;[Expert@xxxxxx0]#&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hyperthreading and CoreXL are both enabled.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;A month or so ago when I checked my SecureXL statistics about 70% of my traffic was being accelerated and now 100% of packets are taking the&amp;nbsp;F2Fed.&amp;nbsp; I am having a heck of a time trying to determine how literally no packets are being accelerated.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The only major things that have changed recently are IPS Protection - I make sure all protections with a critical performance rating are disabled , and JHA take 215.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;[Expert@xxxxx]# fwaccel stat&lt;BR /&gt;+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+&lt;BR /&gt;|Id|Name |Status |Interfaces |Features |&lt;BR /&gt;+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+&lt;BR /&gt;|0 |SND |enabled |eth2-01,eth2-02,eth2-03, |&lt;BR /&gt;| | | |eth2-04,eth2-05,eth2-06, |&lt;BR /&gt;| | | |eth2-07,eth2-08,Sync |Acceleration,Cryptography |&lt;BR /&gt;| | | | |Crypto: Tunnel,UDPEncap,MD5, |&lt;BR /&gt;| | | | |SHA1,NULL,3DES,DES,CAST, |&lt;BR /&gt;| | | | |CAST-40,AES-128,AES-256,ESP, |&lt;BR /&gt;| | | | |LinkSelection,DynamicVPN, |&lt;BR /&gt;| | | | |NatTraversal,AES-XCBC,SHA256 |&lt;BR /&gt;+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Accept Templates : enabled&lt;BR /&gt;Drop Templates : disabled&lt;BR /&gt;NAT Templates : enabled&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;[Expert@xxxxxx]# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 0/0 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 0/2659685415 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 2659685415/2659685415 (100%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 0/2659685415 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/2659685415 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/2659685415 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/2659685415 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/2659685415 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/2659685415 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;[Expert@MAIN-EXT-FWA:0]#&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;[Expert@xxxx# fwaccel stats -p&lt;BR /&gt;F2F packets:&lt;BR /&gt;--------------&lt;BR /&gt;Violation Packets Violation Packets&lt;BR /&gt;-------------------- --------------- -------------------- ---------------&lt;BR /&gt;pkt has IP options 4197 ICMP miss conn 695465&lt;BR /&gt;TCP-SYN miss conn 6076140 TCP-other miss conn 829529441&lt;BR /&gt;UDP miss conn 1835183626 other miss conn 4260&lt;BR /&gt;VPN returned F2F 20 uni-directional viol 0&lt;BR /&gt;possible spoof viol 0 TCP state viol 0&lt;BR /&gt;SCTP state affecting 0 out if not def/accl 0&lt;BR /&gt;bridge, src=dst 0 routing decision err 0&lt;BR /&gt;sanity checks failed 0 fwd to non-pivot 0&lt;BR /&gt;broadcast/multicast 0 cluster message 38231619&lt;BR /&gt;cluster forward 0 chain forwarding 0&lt;BR /&gt;F2V conn match pkts 0 general reason 0&lt;BR /&gt;route changes 0&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2020 17:59:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95704#M18843</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mike_Jensen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-08-31T17:59:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL 100% F2Fed 80.30</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95706#M18844</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Are you checking these statistics on the standby member of a cluster (&lt;STRONG&gt;cphaprob stat&lt;/STRONG&gt;)?&amp;nbsp; 100% F2F is expected in that case since all connections are to and from the firewall itself which are never accelerated.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If you did get these stats on the active member or there isn't a cluster present, it is almost certainly something in your IPS config.&amp;nbsp; You can confirm by running &lt;STRONG&gt;ips off&lt;/STRONG&gt;, then &lt;STRONG&gt;fwaccel stats -r&lt;/STRONG&gt;, waiting two minutes, then &lt;STRONG&gt;fwaccel stats -s&lt;/STRONG&gt;.&amp;nbsp; Note that doing this may expose your organization to attacks, and don't forget to run &lt;STRONG&gt;ips on&lt;/STRONG&gt; when done!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2020 18:14:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95706#M18844</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-08-31T18:14:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL 100% F2Fed 80.30</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95707#M18845</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Tim,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, this is happening on the active cluster member (sorry I should have specified in the original post).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I performed the ips off test twice, once just "ips off" and the second time with "ips off -n", reset the SecureXL statistics, waited two minutes, then checked fw accel stats -s again and the stats are still the same &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":disappointed_face:"&gt;😞&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;[Expert@xxxx:0]# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 0/0 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 0/3099956 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 3099956/3099956 (100%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 0/3099956 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/3099956 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/3099956 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/3099956 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/3099956 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/3099956 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;[Expert@TROY-EXT-A:0]# fwaccel stats -s&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated conns/Total conns : 0/0 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Accelerated pkts/Total pkts : 0/3162794 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2Fed pkts/Total pkts : 3162794/3162794 (100%)&lt;BR /&gt;F2V pkts/Total pkts : 0/3162794 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;CPASXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/3162794 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;PSLXL pkts/Total pkts : 0/3162794 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS inbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/3162794 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;QOS outbound pkts/Total pkts : 0/3162794 (0%)&lt;BR /&gt;Corrected pkts/Total pkts : 0/3162794 (0%)&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2020 18:31:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95707#M18845</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mike_Jensen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-08-31T18:31:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL 100% F2Fed 80.30</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95716#M18848</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Head to your Inspection Settings in the Access Control policy, are there any settings enabled that have a High or Critical performance impact, mainly:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Directory Listing&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Small PMTU&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;SYN Attack (although this is in SecureXL in R80.20+)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Network Quota&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Gzip Enforcement&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; The other place to look will be the 39 IPS "Core Protections" which are still active even when IPS is disabled (!), are any of these enabled:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;HTTP Header Spoofing&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Inbound DNS Requests&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;ISN Spoofing&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;IP ID Masking&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Malicious IPs&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Mismatched Replies&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Scrambling&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;TTL Masking&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Beyond that TAC will need to run a debug to determine why everything is going F2F.&amp;nbsp; This debug isn't nearly as straightforward as it used to be prior to R80.20; please share the commands TAC uses as the kernel debug flags documentation has not been updated for R80.20+.&amp;nbsp;&lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":grinning_face:"&gt;😀&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2020 01:42:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95716#M18848</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-01T01:42:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL 100% F2Fed 80.30</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95782#M18862</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have all of the above Core protections off and all Threat Cloud protections with a performance impact of critical set to inactive as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is there a good rule of thumb to follow in regards to how old a protection should before before marking it as inactive? 5 years, 7 years, etc?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a TAC case open and I will post any debug commands they run.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2020 16:38:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/95782#M18862</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mike_Jensen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-01T16:38:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SecureXL 100% F2Fed 80.30</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/99741#M19419</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;TAC resolved this issue for me!&amp;nbsp; They recreated my environment in their lab and found in one of my VPN communities in the wire mode option I had the box checked for "Allow uninspected encrypted traffic between Wire mode interfaces of this Community members".&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;After I removed the check mark and installed policy I began to see accelerated traffic on all affected HA clusters!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The only debug command / output that I was able to see for this case is:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;@;21151; 1Oct2020 15:11:44.275421;[cpu_1];[fw4_2];get_connkey_flags_should_accelerate: wire mode acceleration is user disabled -&amp;gt; F2F;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2020 18:43:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/SecureXL-100-F2Fed-80-30/m-p/99741#M19419</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mike_Jensen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-10-21T18:43:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

