Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS
| reply to Brano
Re: ZyWall 5 V4.00 (XD.2) released
Take a look at the spec sheets for the two different products........ the diff being firmware, the UTM 4.0 and beyond for all three models 5/35/70 has less throughput and less concurrent sessions in order to (in conjunction with the turbo card) handle the AV/IDP subscription...
--
Ain't nuthin but the blues! "Albert Collins". Leave your troubles at the door! "Pepe Peregil" De Sevilla. Just Don't Wifi without WPA, "Yul Brenner"LlamaWorks Equipment |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
| Throughput is normally a function of features enabled, so if AV/AS/IDP are disabled then throughput should be same between UTM and non-UTM firmware. I believe the number of concurrent session is compiled into the firmware and does not change based on features enabled. |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| I'm wondering IF I can bump up the NAT session back to 6000 since I'm never going to use a turbo card but I do look forward to the next version firmware so I can assign 1 port to WLAN, without having a WLAN PC card installed.
Is the NAT sessions a hard coded part of the firmware or could it be changed in autoexec.net file??
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
Brano
Premium,MVM
join:2002-06-25
Burlington, ON | No, you won't be able to change it. It's set to 4000 sessions for ZyWall5 since ZyNOS4.00. |
|
Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS | Hmm I sense differing opinions.......  |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs: | No differing opinions. My understanding is that # sessions is hard coded (compiled) into current 4.00 firmware. |
|
Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS | Then Brano would be correct. |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs: | Yes, Brano's post was in agreement with my earlier post. |
|
jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA | hmm. why is it hard coded? seems like something worth being able to change. |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| said by jig  :hmm. why is it hard coded? seems like something worth being able to change. Well you can change it, up to the MAX allowed. Which on the Z5 is now 4000. It uses to be 6000. No real biggy being at 4000 for normal use. 4000 should handle many users with normal browsing and a couple of users with heavy P2P use.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA | ah, ok. so for single home use, probably plenty.
just wondering, is there a way to get current sessions on an old rt314? |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| Well even for a business with ?# users, maybe 40-60+. Normal web browsing doesn't use up a lot of NAT session. It's when you have 2-3-4-5-6 people using a P2P app that eat away at them.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA | well.... home use with some p2p... |
|
PVU
join:2005-08-29
Silver Spring, MD
| reply to Anav
Lama wrote:
Take a look at the spec sheets for the two different products........ the diff being firmware, the UTM 4.0 and beyond for all three models 5/35/70 has less throughput and less concurrent sessions in order to (in conjunction with the turbo card) handle the AV/IDP subscription... I have no turbo card. Less throughput: Would it be best to use the latest 3x firmware? I have no AV/IDP. I'm having some speed problems since upgrading to 4x. Is anyone else? |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| None here. From looking at the data sheets it looks like the FW throughput has been lowered on all models with the V4 firmware compared with the 3.64. Z5 80 v3.64, 65 v4, Z35/70 down 10 instead of the 15 for the Z5. The VPN is also down a little on the Z35/70 but the same for the Z5.
Just what type of speed problem are you having and how fast is your connection.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA | reply to jig
i guess my only hesitation is that whoever decided on nat sessions for the 551 thought that 16000 was appropriate...
? |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| I don't know about anyone else but the most Nat sessions I ever used was with 2 P2P apps running, Limewire and WinMX, doing multiple searches on both and multiple downloads on both I got to something like 3700. Not sure if you could ever get to 16000 on a home connection anytime in the near future. Ok Yes you could have the fastest connection on the planet for home use but just how many people will have that type of connection. And with the way things are going P2P could be dead anytime in the near future.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
PVU
join:2005-08-29
Silver Spring, MD
| reply to Shootist
said by Shootist :None here. From looking at the data sheets it looks like the FW throughput has been lowered on all models with the V4 firmware compared with the 3.64. Z5 80 v3.64, 65 v4, Z35/70 down 10 instead of the 15 for the Z5. The VPN is also down a little on the Z35/70 but the same for the Z5. Just what type of speed problem are you having and how fast is your connection. Shoot, I'm assuming that lowered FireWall throughput is a good thing?
After upgrading, it seemed as if overall speed really went south. Interestingly, it seemed that there was a disproportionate split between the users – some faster than others. But, generally speaking, overall speed decreased.
I checked with my (1.5 mbps) provider – thinking it could be on their end. The prelim tests were all good (just shy of 1.5).
Can I go back to 3x?
Also, I’m using a Linksys router as a switch. I would hate to switch switches because my problems are new, but is there a difference in switches.
I wish I could offer more. I guess the big question is: Can I go back to 3x to see what’s up? Thanks |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| Yes you can go back to v3 but after the firmware uplaods the router will go into a continuous reboot. Just hold in the reset button for 15 second and it will clear the reboots and you'll be good to go.
Personally I have not seen any slow downs at all since going to V4 firmware and if there was a problem with V4 it would of shown up on other users units and been reported here. I haven't seen any other than yours.
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA
 ·Verizon west (ex G..
| there WERE initial reports of a slowdown, but it seemed to be a symptom of not resetting the zywall to all defaults from within the firmware and then inputting all the user specific details.
so, if you are seeing a speed drop, try resetting to all defaults, go through the initial setup, and test it again.
your switch should have no bearing on the relative speed changes. i suppose if it was a managed switch and its internal ip address somehow was in contention with the new routers subnet then maybe, but otherwise i have yet to see either a hub or switch be incompatible with multi-vendor hardware, as long as the hardware doesn't have a mechanical fault. |
|
