<?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: SSL Module Throughput issue in Application Networking</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/ssl-module-throughput-issue/m-p/411483#M7358</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;disable the following where? On the CSM or the ssl module? thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:24:53 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>bustaj691</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2005-09-26T16:24:53Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>SSL Module Throughput issue</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/ssl-module-throughput-issue/m-p/411481#M7356</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We have a network segment that has a perimeter pix 535 and behind it two 6500 switches, each has a CSM and a SSL module. We can only hit a max throughput of about 42Mbps when we run a loadrunner test going to one ssl module on https traffic. We add a second SSL module to the CSM loadbalancing and we were able to increase to another 41 Mbps totalling our throughput to about 82 Mbps overall.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are running software version 2.1(4) on the SSL modules. I noticed the following in the ssl modules while the modules were taking in at about 22 Mbps:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;dmzssl1.frsat#sh ssl-proxy status tcp&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;TCP cpu is alive!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;TCP cpu utilization:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    % process util   : 7             % interrupt util : 0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    proc cycles : 0xA93422B253E      int cycles  : 0xD916CBD43A&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    total cycles: 0x96016CBCDE38&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    % process util (5 sec)   : 60            % interrupt util (5 sec) : 2       &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    % process util (1 min)  : 51            % interrupt util (1 min): 1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    % process util (5 min)  : 51            % interrupt util (5 min) : 1        &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;dmzssl1.frsat#sh ssl-proxy status ssl&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;SSL cpu is alive!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;SSL cpu utilization:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    % process util   : 0             % interrupt util : 0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    proc cycles : 0xAA820CE45C       int cycles  : 0x278569E70&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    total cycles: 0x9602074A99C8&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    % process util (5 sec)   : 3             % interrupt util (5 sec) : 0       &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    % process util (1 min)  : 3             % interrupt util (1 min): 0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;    % process util (5 min)  : 3             % interrupt util (5 min) : 0   &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Not sure on how to read these, but does this mean that the tcp process is kind of struggling compared to the ssl process?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are expecting the ssl modules to be able to handle more traffic than just 41 Mbps. It's not really close to what Cisco claims in their data sheets.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is there something else I need to look at or some performance tuning I can do in the ssl module to support more bandwidth? Please help. thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:32:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/ssl-module-throughput-issue/m-p/411481#M7356</guid>
      <dc:creator>bustaj691</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-09-19T17:32:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SSL Module Throughput issue</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/ssl-module-throughput-issue/m-p/411482#M7357</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Check for close queueing traffic models, if it is enabled try disabling it.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also try disabling both the &lt;TCP virtual="" nagle="" disable=""&gt; &amp;amp; &lt;TCP server="" nagle="" disable=""&gt; with&lt;/TCP&gt;&lt;/TCP&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SSL-QUEUE-DELAY 0=""&gt;.&lt;/SSL-QUEUE-DELAY&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This will improve the throughput&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2005 13:39:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/ssl-module-throughput-issue/m-p/411482#M7357</guid>
      <dc:creator>pradeepde</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-09-23T13:39:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SSL Module Throughput issue</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/ssl-module-throughput-issue/m-p/411483#M7358</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;disable the following where? On the CSM or the ssl module? thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:24:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/ssl-module-throughput-issue/m-p/411483#M7358</guid>
      <dc:creator>bustaj691</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-09-26T16:24:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

