RV345P CPU 100%, bad througput, extremely slow web interface

[Marcel.van.Brussel1]

As soon as I want to use Security / Threat/IPS, the router becomes unstable. (No license, just evaluation mode)

Sometimes this occurs after a few days. Traffic to/from WAN is extremely slow and the RV345P web interface is almost unable to reach to change settings.

Rebooting the router (by switching it off and on again) solves the problem for some hours/days.

After rebooting the processor is running at 3-10% and everything is working as it should.

I'm not using VPN or any other settings other than default, just a few VLAN's.

I always use the latest firmware.

Hopefully somebody has a solution, because I can't find any at Cisco's.

.

[balaji.bandi]

as per my understanding RV345P is not full blow NGFW to give you all in one..since you have a feature that does not mean enable all of them to get the right outcome.

 The only suggestion at this moment, If i were you start with feature required in minimum level and keep adding each feature and see where it impacting and report back to TAC, so they aware of the issue and give you better suggestion (if any bug around with that feature causing CPU high)

[Marcel.van.Brussel1]

Nobody has the same problem?
Only when using IPS protection the router becomes unstable.

[Marcel.van.Brussel1]

As soon as I activate IPS or Anti-virus, the CPU is running at 100% and the router cannot be logged on anymore.

Internet connection is lost!

After hard-rebooting the router, everything is running as it should.

Hopefully CISCO will solve this problem as soon as possible. No one would buy a smartlicense this way!!!

[balaji.bandi]

suggest contacting SMB TAC they can investigate for you.

[Marcel.van.Brussel1]

I would need a service contract, don't I???

[balaji.bandi]

if this isn warranty you do not need contract, if finished warranty you need contract for support.

[Marcel.van.Brussel1]

It seems Cisco solved the problem with a new version of firmware, but I'm unable to test if it indeed works, because the evaluation time has passed!!

As long as the evaluation time was running, the problem occurred, so I'd really like Cisco to extend the evaluation time!!

Since the evaluation time had passed, the CPU problem didn't occur anymore at all, so it really was a problem that was created by Cisco!!