I=B4m running a X500 and monitoring the CPU shows a common use between
80-90 %.. Is that normal?
It doesnt matter if there is one or 100 Clients.. its allways up there.
Any ideas?
Yss:=20
PaU
Hi
Can you explain whih crae the services enabled and defined in policy
for traffic bypassing X Box 500
CK
pau_zathrus@hotmail.com wrote:
> I=B4m running a X500 and monitoring the CPU shows a common use between
> 80-90 %.. Is that normal?
> It doesnt matter if there is one or 100 Clients.. its allways up there.
>=20
> Any ideas?
>=20
> Yss:=20
> PaU
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
Leythos skrev:
> In article <1163067159.097532.88390@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
> pau_zathrus@hotmail.com says...
> > I=B4m running a X500 and monitoring the CPU shows a common use between
> > 80-90 %.. Is that normal?
> > It doesnt matter if there is one or 100 Clients.. its allways up there.
> >
> > Any ideas?
>
> No idea - it really depends on what solution you built.
>
> Most of the WG firewalls we have installed, all over the USA/India, run
> about 20%, sometimes a burp to 30%, but that's about it.
>
> Maybe you need to look at what you built, why you selected such a low-
> level (entry level) firewall, and if it was the proper solution for your
> needs.
>
> --
>
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
Behind is a Ws5000 Wireless Switch with 9 AP300 Access Point and a
variation og 10- 130 Mobile Units. (Laptops with Wireless access). On
the outside is a FiberOptic 10-20 Mbit connection.
Short on the Firebox config.
For 30 Users there is free (any out) access.
The rest only has Http allowed.=20
Thats it..=20
Yss:=20
PaU
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
Leythos skrev:
> In article <1163204797.794969.264940@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> pau_zathrus@hotmail.com says...
> >
> > Leythos skrev:
> > > In article <1163067159.097532.88390@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
> > > pau_zathrus@hotmail.com says...
> > > > I=B4m running a X500 and monitoring the CPU shows a common use betw=
een
> > > > 80-90 %.. Is that normal?
> > > > It doesnt matter if there is one or 100 Clients.. its allways up th=
ere.
> > > >
> > > > Any ideas?
> > >
> > > No idea - it really depends on what solution you built.
> > >
> > > Most of the WG firewalls we have installed, all over the USA/India, r=
un
> > > about 20%, sometimes a burp to 30%, but that's about it.
> > >
> > > Maybe you need to look at what you built, why you selected such a low-
> > > level (entry level) firewall, and if it was the proper solution for y=
our
> > > needs.
> >
> > Behind is a Ws5000 Wireless Switch with 9 AP300 Access Point and a
> > variation og 10- 130 Mobile Units. (Laptops with Wireless access). On
> > the outside is a FiberOptic 10-20 Mbit connection.
> > Short on the Firebox config.
> > For 30 Users there is free (any out) access.
> > The rest only has Http allowed.
> > Thats it..
> > Yss:
> > PaU
>
> Based on what you've shown above, it would seem that you've bought to
> little appliance for your solution.
>
> Would it be correct to assume that you're using routed mode (NAT)
> instead of Drop-In mode.
>
> When you say Mobile units, are you talking about Mobile VPN users?
>
> It really appears as though you bought to small an appliance for the
> solution you were building.
>
> --
>
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
It should be able to handle 140 concurrent clients shouldn=B4t it? No
VPN. Mobile Units are just Laptops with Wireless within the Wireless
LAN. No external users..
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)