<?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: FTD 1000 vs 2100 TLS performance in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524398#M1086073</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the link Marvin.&amp;nbsp; In my case I won't be doing much VPN.&amp;nbsp; My main concern is maximum IPS protection of web servers behind the firewall.&amp;nbsp; Given that almost all web traffic is encrypted nowadays, which numbers should I be concentrating on?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 13:59:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>tato386</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-12-28T13:59:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>FTD 1000 vs 2100 TLS performance</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524209#M1086062</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I was browsing Cisco's web site looking specifically for SSL/TLS decryption specs for 1000 and 2100 FTD devices when I ran into something I did not expect.&amp;nbsp; According to the site (see attached files) the 2100 family has better specs pretty much across the board *except* for TLS?&amp;nbsp; Is this an error or misprint?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Another thing I noticed is that specs for FW+AVC, FW+AVC+IPS and for TLS are separated.&amp;nbsp; What about if I would like to use all four features, meaning FW+AVC+IPS+TLS?&amp;nbsp; How is that measured/rated?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Diego&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 03:33:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524209#M1086062</guid>
      <dc:creator>tato386</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-12-28T03:33:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FTD 1000 vs 2100 TLS performance</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524378#M1086070</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Due to the CPU used, the Firepower 1000 series are able to use Intel Quick Assist Technology (QAT) and get better TLS performance as a result.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/intel-quick-assist-technology-overview.html" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/intel-quick-assist-technology-overview.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The TLS numbers generally aren't stressed unless the firewall is serving a large number of remote access VPN clients so it's usually not the gating performance factor when considering which device is recommended. Overall throughput as bounded by the "FW+ x" numbers is usually more important.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 13:12:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524378#M1086070</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-12-28T13:12:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FTD 1000 vs 2100 TLS performance</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524398#M1086073</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the link Marvin.&amp;nbsp; In my case I won't be doing much VPN.&amp;nbsp; My main concern is maximum IPS protection of web servers behind the firewall.&amp;nbsp; Given that almost all web traffic is encrypted nowadays, which numbers should I be concentrating on?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 13:59:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524398#M1086073</guid>
      <dc:creator>tato386</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-12-28T13:59:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FTD 1000 vs 2100 TLS performance</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524409#M1086074</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If you are planning to do SSL/TLS decryption of your web servers' traffic then it's a whole other calculation as that is much more CPU-intensive than basic TLS termination.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You might want to check with your Cisco SE or reseller to have them run the numbers through Cisco's internal / partner performance tool for that use case.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 14:33:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524409#M1086074</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-12-28T14:33:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FTD 1000 vs 2100 TLS performance</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524462#M1086077</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Sounds like a plan.&amp;nbsp; Thx&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 15:54:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-1000-vs-2100-tls-performance/m-p/4524462#M1086077</guid>
      <dc:creator>tato386</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-12-28T15:54:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

