[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Re[2]: ISAKMP performance

To: "C. Harald Koch" <chk@tor.securecomputing.com>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: ISAKMP performance
From: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 12:28:38 -0400
Cc: dpkemp@missi.ncsc.mil (David P. Kemp), ipsec@tis.com
In-Reply-To: chk's message of Mon, 21 Jul 1997 11:43:11 -0400. <97Jul21.113827edt.11650@janus.tor.securecomputing.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

> Not quite. The 1000/second refers to a reset or power outage, where you get
> slammed with (e.g.) 1000 simultaneous incoming calls. This is peak load; the
> average call-cycle load would be much lower (~200/minute, or merely
> 3.3/second :-).

If this is the case, it sounds like the original requirement was
poorly stated.

Is the *actual* requirement "must be able to withstand a burst of
several thousand SA requests over several seconds without falling
over"?  If it gets the burst, and then takes a minute or two to chew
through all of them (without dropping any), is that OK?

					- Bill

References:

Re: Re[2]: ISAKMP performance

From: "C. Harald Koch" <chk@tor.securecomputing.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Re[2]: ISAKMP performance
Next by Date: Re[4]: ISAKMP performance
Prev by thread: Re: Re[2]: ISAKMP performance
Next by thread: Re: ISAKMP performance
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread