IPS traffic over performace limit

Hi,
I could not find any information about traffic which is over declared IPS appliance performance (throughput) limit.
Those packets will be droped or will pass through without inspection?
Thanks in advance!
Radim

Hi Radim,
Oversubscription in IPS is at Interface level or Virtual Sensor level.
Hypothetically say IPS has 6 interfaces each being a gig port.
This does not mean IPS throughput is 6 gigs, since the inspection engine may not be able to handle 6 gig at a time.
For interface level oversubscription, if you send more traffic to an interface than it can handle, then you overwhelm its interface buffers.
The packets get dropped at the interface level.
The ' FIFO errors' counter under 'show interface' will show this error.
Packets dropped because too much traffic it being sent to virtual sensor than it can handle will be seen as 'missed packet percentage' counter.
I shall check if this traffic is dropped or passed through uninspected and let you know.
The throughput of the IPS depends on the type of traffic flowing through it.
Please check the document below which explains IPS performance with some data for 4270.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/vpndevc/ps5729/ps5713/ps4077/prod_white_paper0900aecd806e7283.html
Hope this helps.
Sid Chandrachud
Cisco TAC - Security Team

Similar Messages

  • How can i use an existing vpn connection without using the option "Send all traffic over vpn connection"?

    I have been trying to get my computer (os x.7) to astablish a remote desktop connection to my work computer via a vpn tunnel. In fact I have just discovered that it works fine if i select to "send all traffic over vpn connection" from the options in the advanced setup of the vpn.
    If the option is selected microsofts "Remote desktop connection for mac" works just fine. However without selecting the option it is not taking advantage of the tunnel but tries to connect as if the tunnel would not exist.
    Now the question is how do I get program to use the vpn tunnel without checking the above option?
    Thanks for any hints and pointers.

    Then can her computer be authorized to both accounts?
    Absolutely. You can authorize any given computer to up to five iTunes Store accounts.
    If purchases are made on her account, to a computer authorized to my account, can I put those songs on my iPod?
    If you connect your iPod to her computer, yes. Tracks download only to the computer from which they're purchased, regardless of which iTunes Store account is used for the purchase. Or you could copy the tracks from her computer to yours and then authorize your computer to her iTunes Store account. But that's sort of defeating the original purpose, it would seem to me.
    is it better to buy music through Amazon downloads and/or actually purchasing CDs to avoid the security features iTunes puts on its music?
    That's certainly an option. If it's an entire album I want, I buy CDs. That way I can import them at the quality I want and to whichever of my systems I want. Amazon or one of the other download stores that offer tracks as MP3 are also an option, though for me download stores are best when you just want a couple of tracks off a given CD.

  • Over query limit while integrating google maps

    Hi
    I am getting over query limit error when i want to display more than 11 records while integrating google maps in obiee. I can display upto 11 records in the map.If i increase the row limit its throwing the error.
    Error: Geocode was not succesfull for the following reason: Over_query_limit
    How to overcome this error,in order to fetch more than 11 records in the map?
    I have only two columns in the report
    state code || No.Of Customers
    In narrative view i have the following code
    Replace ?!? with <
    Prefix part
    ?!?script type="text/javascript" src="http://maps.google.com/maps/api/js?sensor=false">
    ?!?/script>
    ?!?script type="text/javascript">
    var geocoder;
    var map;
    function initialize() {
    geocoder = new google.maps.Geocoder();
    var latlng = new google.maps.LatLng(37.4219720, -122.0841430);
    var myOptions = {
    zoom: 8,
    center: latlng,
    mapTypeId: google.maps.MapTypeId.ROADMAP
    map = new google.maps.Map(document.getElementById("map_canvas"), myOptions);
    GetMapAdress ();
    function showAddress(address,comment) {
    if (geocoder) {
    geocoder.geocode( { 'address': address}, function(results, status) {
    if (status == google.maps.GeocoderStatus.OK) {
    map.setCenter(results[0].geometry.location);
    var marker = new google.maps.Marker({
    map: map,
    position: results[0].geometry.location
    var infowindow = new google.maps.InfoWindow({
    content:comment
    google.maps.event.addListener(marker, 'click', function() {
    infowindow.open(map,marker);
    } else {
    alert("Geocode was not successful for the following reason: " + status);
    function GetMapAdress (){
    Narrative:
    showAddress('@1', ' No Of customers are @2');
    Postfix part:
    ?!?/script>
    ?!?script src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.3.2/jquery.js" type="text/javascript">?!?/script>
    ?!?script type="text/javascript">
    $(document).ready( function(){initialize();return false;});
    ?!?/script>
    ?!?body onunload="GUnload()">
    ?!?div id="map_canvas" style="width: 800px; height: 700px" > ?!?/div>
    ?!?/body>
    This gives the count as per the state in the google map, if we click a state it will show us the count, but its holding good only for 11 records in the map
    Appreciate your response

    I haven't yet used the tag. It looks quite interesting.
    I had a look at the
    cf_googleMap
    Documentation out of curiosity. Apparently, putting
    <cf_googlemapshow/> at the end, just before the closing body
    tag, solves a number of Javascript issues.

  • Best way to pass IPv4 and IPv6 traffic over a GRE Tunnel

    Hello,
    We have two 3825 routers with Advanced Enterprise IOS 12.4.9(T). Each of them serves many IPv4 (private and public) and IPv6 networks on their respective site.
    We have created a wireless link between the two, using 4 wireless devices, with IP Addresses 10.10.2.2, 3, 4, 5 respectively (1 and 6 are the two end Ethernet interfaces on the routers).
    Then we created a GRE tunnel over this link using addresses 172.16.1.1 and 2 (for the two ends) to route traffic over this link.
    Now we want to route IPv6 traffic over the same link. However, we found that simply routing the IPv6 traffic over the above GRE / IP tunnel did not work.
    Questions:
    Is there a way we can use the same (GRE / IP) tunnel to transport both IPv4 and IPv6 traffic?
    If not, can we setup two GRE tunnels over the same wireless link, that is, one GRE / IP for IPv4 traffic and a second one GRE / IPv6 for IPv6 traffic?
    In brief, what is the suggested way to transport IPv4 and IPv6 traffic over the aforementioned (wireless) link?
    I have read http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios/12_4/interface/configuration/guide/inb_tun.html#wp1061361 and other Internet material, however I am still confused.
    Please help.
    Thanks in advance,
    Nick

    We have set up two tunnels over the same link, one GRE / IP for the IPv4 traffic and one IPv6 / IP ("manual") for the IPv6 traffic. This setup seems to be working OK.
    If there are other suggestions, please advise.
    Thanks,
    Nick

  • Encapsulate ODBC traffice over HTTP???

    Does anyone know if it's possible to have an external client (in the internet) make an ODBC connection to a database that is behind a firewall which only allows HTTP traffic to pass through? I guess the question is, Is is possible to encapsulate ODBC traffic over the HTTP protocol so that it can pass through the firewall?
    Thanks in advance,
    John Sebastian

    Probably not easily, no.
    If the firewall allows arbitrary traffic on port 80, you could configure the Oracle database to accept connections on that port and configure the tnsnames.ora on the client machine to use port 80. This wouldn't go through HTTP, so if the firewall is actually analyzing the traffic, you'd be out of luck, but it would work if the port is wide open. Of course, it is a terrible idea from a security perspective-- opening up databases to connections over the internet is a recipe for pain and suffering.
    It is certainly possible to write an ODBC to HTTP proxy that converts an ODBC call into some sort of web service call and then write an HTTP to ODBC proxy that lives inside the firewall that translates the HTTP calls back into ODBC calls, but that is likely to be very slow. And a lot of code-- I'm not aware of any commercial utilities that do that sort of thing.
    Generally, the proper way to do something like this is to use Oracle Connection Manager (or something similar that is baked in to certain firewall products) to proxy the Oracle connection through the firewall. But that requires changing the firewall setup and/or installing additional software.
    Justin

  • We have just gone over our limit for data usage this month. Is it possible to add data just for this month?

    We have just gone over our limit for data usage this month. Is it possible to add data just for this month?

    YES.  YOU GOING TO DO A PLAN CHANGE.  WHEN IT GIES YOU DATE OPTIONS YOUR GOING TO BACK DATE IT TO BEGINING OF CYCLE.    ONCE THAT GOES THROUGH DO ANOTHER PLAN CHANGE BACK TO IRIGINAL PLAN AND FUTURE DATE TO BEGINIGN OF NEXT BILL CYCLE.  THIS ALL CAN BE DONE ON MY VERIZON OR IF YOU FEEL SAFER CALL CUSTOMER CARE AND THEY CAN DO THSI FOR YOU

  • TS3297 When do I get to purchase in app purchase again since I went over my limit

    Because I went over my limit today and I would like to know when can I be able to purchase in app content

    Thanks for sharing, but you are not addressing Apple here. This is a user-to-user forum.
    You can leave feedback for Apple at:
    www.apple.com/feedback/iphone.html
    Maybe you should make an appointment at the Genius Bar, my iphone works just right.

  • Muliticast Traffic Over ATM Link

    Hi,
    I have a ATM link (45Mb/s) between 2 location . In one of my locations I multicast 4 diffrent Video traffic. But my 4 multicast traffic is going to the source router by 1 Fastethernet port and after that it's going to destionation over the ATM link. now I have a issue on destionation . I need to seperate 4 multicast traffic on the destionation router . it has to be  1 on of my multicast traffic going through VLAN 123 and other 3 multicast traffics going through VLAN 200.
    now all of the multicast traffic is going trough vlan 123.
    any body can help me on this issue?
    thanks
    Mike

    Hey Stephan,
    The 'vpc bind-vrf' command allocates a special internal VLAN for routing traffic over the vPC peer-link to ensure L3 connections on the vPC peer or orphan ports successfully receive multicast traffic on N5k/N6k platforms.  This workaround is not needed on the N7K because that platform implements the vPC loop prevention rule differently in hardware.
    In short, 'vpc bind-vrf' is not required on N7K.
    -Andy

  • How to priortize video & voice traffic over mpls network

    Dear all,
    I have taken a 512k link from mpls network containing juniper as core routers, while i am using completely cisco in my network, my query is can i priortize my voice and video traffic over this mpls network i am also using rtp header compression.
    plz give me sample config if it is possible.
    thanks

    hi
    if i m not wrong there will be different kinda service offering in general being provided by the SPs.
    it falls under 2 main major categories one is managed and the other is unmanaged.
    in managed services your SP will honour the marking being done by the customers and the same is being carried throughout(in SP backbone) till reaching the remote destination.
    in unmanaged services whatever markings you do at ur end will be remarked or ignored by SP according to the policies followed by them.
    you can enquire about this with your SP and you can have the QOS policies configured accordingly.
    regds

  • RV042 - Priority Routing HTTP Traffic Over WAN2?

    Hi,
    I have an RV042 set to load balancing.  WAN1 is a T1 and WAN2 is an ADSL connection.  It seems that more often than not web traffic is going out over the slower WAN1, so I'd like to try to route http traffic over the ADSL before the T1 due to the higher download speed.
    Is there a way to do this?
    Thanks!

    blasty,
    Yes it is possible. It is called protocol binding, and the configuration steps for this can be found on page 23 of this guide:
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/csbr/rv042/admin/guide/RV042_V10_UG_C-WEB.pdf
    If you have any problems please post them in as much detail as possible.
    Bill

  • Transporting QinQ traffic over L2 EoMPLS circuit

    Hello,
    Suppose that we have QinQ traffic that reaches a GigabitEthernet interface of a GSR. (The second VLAN tag has been previously imposed at a dot1q-tunnel interface of some edge switch. Traffic that reaches the GSR has 2 VLAN tags.) We want to deliver this traffic (over an MPLS backbone) to the GigabitEthernet interface of another GSR. What configuration options are there ? Would a configuration like the following (symmetrically configured at both GigabitEthernet interfaces) work and why ?
    interface GigabitEthernet s1/s2/s3.x
    encapsulation dot1Q x
    xconnect <peer-router-id> <vc-id> encapsulation mpls
    (x above is supposed to play the role of the outermost/service VLAN tag)
    I am wondering whether the command encapsulation dot1q second-dot1q is actually needed or not.
    Any answers or documentation or related standards/drafts will be appreciated.
    Kind Regards,
    Maria

    HI Maria, [Pls RATE if HELPS]
    I have implemented a Scenario as below:
    Base Station - A
    =================
    Metro Edge Switch Config:
    int Gi 0/46
    switchport access vlan 402 >> OuterVLAN in QnQ
    switchport mode dot1q-tunnel
    description X-Connect to BaseStation-LAN
    Base Satation LAN Switch Config:
    int GI 0/45
    description X-connection to Metro Edge
    switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
    switchport mode trunk
    Bast Station - B
    =================
    Metro Edge Switch Config:
    int GI 0/46
    switchport access vlan 401 >> OuterVlan in QnQ
    switchport mode dot1q-tunnel
    description X-connect to Bast Station LAN
    Base Station LAN Switch Config:
    int GI 0/45
    description X-Connect to Metro Edge
    switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
    switchport mode trunk
    NOC:
    ====
    Metro Head end Switch Config:
    int GI 0/45
    description to X-Connect to Provider Edge
    switchport mode dot1q-tunnel
    switchport mode trunk
    Provider Edge Router Config:
    int Gi 0/1.402100
    encapsulation dot1q 402 second-dot1q 100
    !! 402 is the OuterVLAN and 100 is Customer VLAN
    ip address 10.100.0.101 255.255.255.252
    description Customer Bast Station - A
    int Gi 0/1.401100
    encapsulation dot1q 401 second-dot1q 100
    !! 401 is the OuterVLAN and 100 is Customer VLAN
    ip address 10.100.0.101 255.255.255.252
    description Customer Bast Station - B
    In the above Config the QnQ is enabled in the Metro Edge & provider edge routers encapsulation function will be carried out by the edge metro switches and PE Routers. By this way the VLAN's are duplicated are in Metro network itself also making the VLAN allocation locally.
    Hope I am Informative.
    PLS RATE if HELPS
    Best Regards,
    Guru Prasad R

  • Vpc bind-vrf on Nexus 7000/N7k to ensure forwarding of multicast traffic over peer-link?

    In previous vPC setups with N5k (or also N6k), I had to use the 'vpc bind-vrf' command to ensure the forwarding of multicast over the vpc peer-link, especially for receivers in in non-vPC VLANs and the receivers connected to Layer 3 interfaces.
    I am wondering why this command isn't available on N7k? Isn't this necessary on this platform or is it just not yet implemented?
    Any hint is welcome!
    Stephan Strack

    Hey Stephan,
    The 'vpc bind-vrf' command allocates a special internal VLAN for routing traffic over the vPC peer-link to ensure L3 connections on the vPC peer or orphan ports successfully receive multicast traffic on N5k/N6k platforms.  This workaround is not needed on the N7K because that platform implements the vPC loop prevention rule differently in hardware.
    In short, 'vpc bind-vrf' is not required on N7K.
    -Andy

  • Over the limit notification

    Has anyone else noticed that Verizon has stopped sending over-the-limit texts messages to your phone?
    I was told they did it at 90%, then about 100%. They have done this for me for a couple of years, this past billing cycle they didn't and i assumed since i had not heard from them, i was not over the limit and didn't checked. Got stuck with an additional charge on my bill.
    When I inquired about it, I was told they don't guarantee that they will send text message notifications.
    Anyone else run into this?

    I got color change to red in console when threshold
    is over the limit, but I didn't get any notification
    by email.Did you actually turn on the email action for that limit? It's not automatic as soon as you configure Solaris to send email.
    In the Attribute Editor window, right next to where you specified your red (critical) limit in the "Alarms" tab, there will be an "Actions" tab. You need to turn on the email action for the critical threshold. Get rid of the current red alarm and make a new one to test it.
    If you want to configure email actions from a single place (instead of for every severity of all the things that can go wrong on each system, by hand): take a look at EventAction:
    http://www.halcyoninc.com/products/EventAction/index.php
    Regards,
    [email protected]

  • Forward internet traffic over openvpn?

    My current setup is that I have an openvpn server running at home and a client running on my laptop. The connection works (I can ssh over it) but I want to forward my (web browsing) traffic over it as well. Does anyone know how to accomplish this? I'm running KDE if that helps.

    Another option would be to set your gateway to the far end of the vpn and make sure you enable routing on that box. That would make *all* traffic bound for the internet travel through the vpn. This may not be what you want.
    One thing to watch with the proxy aproach is that while your web traffic is sent through the vpn, your dns lookups will stil be going through your isp making it possible to see which websites you have been to. There is an option in firefox to fix this if it bothers you.

  • HT1420 I forgot to deauthorize two old computers, putting me over the limit of 5. Do I deauthorize all and then reauthorize the 4 I have left? Can I just deauthorize the old two somehow?

    I forgot to deauthorize two old computers, putting me over the limit of 5. Do I deauthorize all and then reauthorize the 4 I have left? Can I just deauthorize the old two somehow?

    ". Do I deauthorize all and then reauthorize the 4 I have left?"
    Yes
    Can I just deauthorize the old two somehow?"
    No

Maybe you are looking for