We're looking at running a memory-intensive process for a web site as a
Windows service in isolation of IIS because IIS refuses to consume all of
the available physical RAM. Considering remoting to move data in and out of
this process. Need something that's quick and dirty and easy to implement,
but that's performant and secure at the same time. Any suggestions /
tutorials? Would prefer not to go on the TCP/IP stack (socket) as it is not
very performant, but it certainly is quick and dirty and we might go with it
anyway anyway unless there is another way with shared memory that is as easy
and more performant.
Jon
Apr 5 '07
28  4943 
I see what you're saying, per your original reply. I guess I need to do some
tests to see what impact MarshalByRef implementation, for remoting, would
have. The problem is the level of effort for MMF, which isn't native to .NET
(or is it?).
We are performing search queries between the IIS process and the indexing
process, so the client/server model works fine for us (better, actually).
The compromise of ease of implementation w/ MarshalByRef for Ipc vs. the
performance overhead of TCP sockets might be legitimate enough to go with
IPC remoting over named pipes.
But if you can find a sample of MMF that's straightforward , obviously not
necessarily as straightforward as the link I just found and posted but
relatively readable, I'd be most grateful.
I'm really not interested at this time in pursuing the purchase of
third-party middleware. Free and open-source, maybe, but one would think
Microsoft would get this stuff to work right out of the .NET box.
Jon
"Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]" <mv*@spam.guard .caspershouse.c omwrote in
message news:On******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...
Jon,
You could use that, but in the end, you have to consider how much data
you are going to push across this pipe. MMF might be better if you have
to access that data, but for signalling between the two applications, I
would go with remoting, or, if you can use .NET 3.0 (which is 2.0 with
some additional class libraries) then, you should use WCF.
--
- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
- mv*@spam.guard. caspershouse.co m
"Jon Davis" <jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP05.phx.gbl. ..
>>
"Jon Davis" <jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote in message
news:us******* *******@TK2MSFT NGP04.phx.gbl.. .
>>This looks rediculously straightforward .
http://www.developer.com/net/vb/arti...0926_3520891_2
Erm, that's Part 2 of a two-part, rediculously straightforward article.
http://www.developer.com/net/vb/arti...0926_3520891_1
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 10:32:44 -0700, Jon Davis
<jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote:
The memory load could be in the range of 1GB, basically hosting indexes
in-memory for fast access to search thousands of large pieces of data.
The server has 4GB, but IIS never uses more than 1GB, which leaves us 3GB
unused, and also makes IIS vulnerable to running out of RAM if we were to
fill up its tiny 1GB rather than isolate the process.
This might be a dumb question, but...
Are you using a 64-bit version of IIS on a 64-bit version of Windows?
In 32-bit land, it wouldn't surprise me at all to find a practical limit
of around 1GB for a single process. The address space itself available to
the process is only 2GB, and with fragmentation and other issues, a
process may very well not be able to allocate more than about 1GB of large
things.
If you're running into a 32-bit Windows issue, it's not clear to me that
you'll be able to do much better than IIS is already doing for you.
If this is all under 64-bit Windows then I agree IIS should work better
than that, and none of the above is relevant.
Pete
"Peter Duniho" <Np*********@nn owslpianmk.comw rote in message
news:op******** *******@petes-computer.local. ..
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 10:32:44 -0700, Jon Davis
<jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote:
>The memory load could be in the range of 1GB, basically hosting indexes
in-memory for fast access to search thousands of large pieces of data.
The server has 4GB, but IIS never uses more than 1GB, which leaves us 3GB
unused, and also makes IIS vulnerable to running out of RAM if we were to
fill up its tiny 1GB rather than isolate the process.
This might be a dumb question, but...
Are you using a 64-bit version of IIS on a 64-bit version of Windows?
In 32-bit land, it wouldn't surprise me at all to find a practical limit
of around 1GB for a single process. The address space itself available to
the process is only 2GB, and with fragmentation and other issues, a
process may very well not be able to allocate more than about 1GB of large
things.
If you're running into a 32-bit Windows issue, it's not clear to me that
you'll be able to do much better than IIS is already doing for you.
If this is all under 64-bit Windows then I agree IIS should work better
than that, and none of the above is relevant.
Pete
No, but 1GB for IIS + 1GB for a service app = 2GB utilization and 1GB per
process, with another 1/2 to 1 GB physical RAM readily available on a 4GB
box. Whereas, 1GB max for IIS alone w/ the service process inside IIS = 1/2
GB for the service process and 1/2 for the web app (assuming that memory
utilization was taken up proporationatel y). Moving the process out seems to
be a no-brainer.
I have heard that 64-bit for IIS is pointlessly ineffective. Whereas, 64-bit
for SQL Server was a blazing improvement both for speed and for memory
scalability.
Jon
Jon,
In this article http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/20050116.asp
I did some "proof of concept" work with MMF's using the MetalWrench Toolbox
assembly, a copy of which is in the bin/debug folder of the associated
download.
It was the only one I tested that held up consistently under heavy load.
Peter
--
Site: http://www.eggheadcafe.com
UnBlog: http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com
Short urls & more: http://ittyurl.net
"Jon Davis" wrote:
I see what you're saying, per your original reply. I guess I need to do some
tests to see what impact MarshalByRef implementation, for remoting, would
have. The problem is the level of effort for MMF, which isn't native to .NET
(or is it?).
We are performing search queries between the IIS process and the indexing
process, so the client/server model works fine for us (better, actually).
The compromise of ease of implementation w/ MarshalByRef for Ipc vs. the
performance overhead of TCP sockets might be legitimate enough to go with
IPC remoting over named pipes.
But if you can find a sample of MMF that's straightforward , obviously not
necessarily as straightforward as the link I just found and posted but
relatively readable, I'd be most grateful.
I'm really not interested at this time in pursuing the purchase of
third-party middleware. Free and open-source, maybe, but one would think
Microsoft would get this stuff to work right out of the .NET box.
Jon
"Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]" <mv*@spam.guard .caspershouse.c omwrote in
message news:On******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...
Jon,
You could use that, but in the end, you have to consider how much data
you are going to push across this pipe. MMF might be better if you have
to access that data, but for signalling between the two applications, I
would go with remoting, or, if you can use .NET 3.0 (which is 2.0 with
some additional class libraries) then, you should use WCF.
--
- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
- mv*@spam.guard. caspershouse.co m
"Jon Davis" <jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP05.phx.gbl. ..
>
"Jon Davis" <jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote in message
news:us******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...
This looks rediculously straightforward .
http://www.developer.com/net/vb/arti...0926_3520891_2
Erm, that's Part 2 of a two-part, rediculously straightforward article.
http://www.developer.com/net/vb/arti...0926_3520891_1
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 16:54:51 -0700, Jon Davis
<jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote:
[...]
No, but 1GB for IIS + 1GB for a service app = 2GB utilization and 1GB
per process, with another 1/2 to 1 GB physical RAM readily available on
a 4GB
box. Whereas, 1GB max for IIS alone w/ the service process inside IIS =
1/2 GB for the service process and 1/2 for the web app (assuming that
memory
utilization was taken up proporationatel y). Moving the process out seems
to be a no-brainer.
Unless you run into performance and/or code maintenance problems doing
so. :)
At the very least, the fact that you're using Win32 seems to explain to me
the behavior you're seeing. It's not that IIS refuses to use more
physical RAM. It's likely simply that it can't.
I have heard that 64-bit for IIS is pointlessly ineffective. Whereas,
64-bit for SQL Server was a blazing improvement both for speed and for
memory scalability.
I have heard that people hear a lot of things about software that turn out
to not be true. :)
Seriously though, until you've tried it you won't really know whether
64-bit IIS would help you or not. Even in some tests 64-bit IIS doesn't
improve performance, that doesn't tell you very much unless you know how
those tests were run and whether they even had a theoretical chance to
consume more than one or two gigabytes of memory. I can easily see how,
for a lot of web server scenarios, virtual or physical memory just doesn't
play a big part in performance.
I don't know what your specific scenario is or what sort of resources you
have to apply to the problem. But if it were me, I'd try my application
under 64-bit Windows with 64-bit IIS to see if that was enough to gain the
benefit in performance I was looking for. I'd do that before I spent a
lot of time trying to work around apparent deficiencies in the 32-bit
paradigm, especially given that 64-bit is here now and will be dominant in
the near future (especially for server stuff).
Pete
"Jon Davis" <jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP06.phx.gbl. ..
>
"Peter Duniho" <Np*********@nn owslpianmk.comw rote in message
news:op******** *******@petes-computer.local. ..
>On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 10:32:44 -0700, Jon Davis <jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote:
>>The memory load could be in the range of 1GB, basically hosting indexes
in-memory for fast access to search thousands of large pieces of data. The server has
4GB, but IIS never uses more than 1GB, which leaves us 3GB
unused, and also makes IIS vulnerable to running out of RAM if we were to
fill up its tiny 1GB rather than isolate the process.
This might be a dumb question, but...
Are you using a 64-bit version of IIS on a 64-bit version of Windows?
In 32-bit land, it wouldn't surprise me at all to find a practical limit of around 1GB
for a single process. The address space itself available to the process is only 2GB, and
with fragmentation and other issues, a process may very well not be able to allocate more
than about 1GB of large things.
If you're running into a 32-bit Windows issue, it's not clear to me that you'll be able
to do much better than IIS is already doing for you.
If this is all under 64-bit Windows then I agree IIS should work better than that, and
none of the above is relevant.
Pete
No, but 1GB for IIS + 1GB for a service app = 2GB utilization and 1GB per process, with
another 1/2 to 1 GB physical RAM readily available on a 4GB box. Whereas, 1GB max for IIS
alone w/ the service process inside IIS = 1/2 GB for the service process and 1/2 for the
web app (assuming that memory utilization was taken up proporationatel y). Moving the
process out seems to be a no-brainer.
I have heard that 64-bit for IIS is pointlessly ineffective. Whereas, 64-bit for SQL
Server was a blazing improvement both for speed and for memory scalability.
Jon
First of all, asp.net does NOT run in the IIS process space, each asp.net program runs in a
process separated from IIS.
Second, there is no such 1GB limit for asp.net either, to me, it looks like you are
allocating a single array of (whatever type), and here you are limited by the largest chunk
of contiguous memory available in the process space at the moment of allocation. This chunk
is ~1.7 GB when the process starts on a 32 bit version of Windows, but can easily drop to a
few MB when your allocation scheme breaks down the largest space into fragments.
In this case, the only solution is to move to 64 bit, remoting, even over shared memory, is
no solution at all, you can't guarantee to find ~1GB free contigious memory in a 32 bit
process ever.
Note that you can't allocate objects larger than 2GB in .NET, even on 64 bit.
Willy.
"Willy Denoyette [MVP]" <wi************ *@telenet.bewro te in message
news:Op******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...
First of all, asp.net does NOT run in the IIS process space, each asp.net
program runs in a process separated from IIS.
Of course; all instances of "IIS" mentioned in this thread are short-form
references the ASP.NET app we are executing.
Second, there is no such 1GB limit for asp.net either,
IIS "self-tunes" itself and avoids taking up more than roughly one quarter
of the available physical RAM, which is far less than standalone process
will allow for. We have seen OutOfMemoryExce ptions frequently by stepping
above this threshhold, despite at least a gig of available physical RAM.
This does not work well for a dedicated web host machine.
Of course, we can look at experimenting more with 64-bit machines that have
gobs of RAM and see what a quarter of 8GB (2GB) would do for us, but that's
not the point. The point is I am looking in parallel at IPC and that's what
this thread is for.
Jon
On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 09:17:45 -0700, Jon Davis
<jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote:
[...]
IIS "self-tunes" itself and avoids taking up more than roughly one
quarter of the available physical RAM, which is far less than standalone
process will allow for.
Can you document the claim that "IIS 'self-tunes' itself and avoids taking
up more than roughly one quarter of the available physical RAM"? I have
never heard anything of the sort, and there's nothing about the
description of the behavior that you've given that suggests it's true.
It is false that there is any relationship between physical RAM and the
maximum allocation that a "standalone process will allow for". Under
Win32, the 2GB virtual address space limit means that even under optimal
conditions no application will ever use more than half of the installed
ram when 4GB is installed, and a typical application will only be able to
allocate some amount much less (and 1GB is not at all an uncommon upper
bound for a typical application).
We have seen OutOfMemoryExce ptions frequently by stepping
above this threshhold, despite at least a gig of available physical RAM.
This means nothing. If you are running 32-bit Windows, with 4GB of RAM it
is absolutely normal for an application to not be able to allocate any
more memory even while physical RAM has 1GB or more available. With 4GB
installed, the limit on how much memory an application can allocate isn't
the physical RAM, it's the virtual address space.
This does not work well for a dedicated web host machine.
Of course, we can look at experimenting more with 64-bit machines that
have gobs of RAM and see what a quarter of 8GB (2GB) would do for us,
but that's not the point. The point is I am looking in parallel at IPC
and that's what this thread is for.
Your assumption that under 64-bit Windows you would only be able to
allocate 2GB of memory with 8GB installed is unfounded. Under 64-bit
Windows, even with only 4GB installed, you should be able to allocate as
much memory as you can use, and if that exceeds 4GB then you can be
assured of consuming all physical RAM. There's no arbitrary "1 to 4
ratio" between physical RAM and allocations allowed.
Also, your interest in IPC is predicated on an incorrect understanding of
what's going on with the memory management. Why waste time pursuing a
solution that is assured to do no better than what is already occurring?
You need to better understand the memory management issue you're dealing
with before you start tackling work-arounds to it.
Pete
Can you document the claim that "IIS 'self-tunes' itself http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...b70352baa.mspx
and avoids taking up more than roughly one quarter of the available
physical RAM"?
No, this was an observation of our site.
>We have seen OutOfMemoryExce ptions frequently by stepping
above this threshhold, despite at least a gig of available physical RAM.
This means nothing. If you are running 32-bit Windows, with 4GB of RAM it
is absolutely normal for an application to not be able to allocate any
more memory even while physical RAM has 1GB or more available.
That's not true; a standalone app can and will allocate RAM and will begin
using available virtual memory when unreserved physical RAM is no longer
available. IIS is FAR more likely to throw OutOfMemoryExce ptions than a
standalone app. I may not be a world-class developer yet but 10 years of
experience with developing both IIS apps and Windows apps gives me enough to
go on.
IIS memory utilization in itself is not the issue here. The issue is we have
a process that we have a large process that we've decided will be
implemented as a Windows service and that will be accessible by multiple web
apps.
Your assumption that under 64-bit Windows you would only be able to
allocate 2GB of memory with 8GB installed is unfounded.
Although self-limitation of the raw memory utilization of IIS isn't
"unfounded" , said ratio was stated slightly tongue-in-cheek because the
symptom was observed by us. We did already try using 64-bit Windows with no
significant memory utilization changes for IIS. But since this is still
OT--as I said, the purpose of the thread was to examine IPC--this is the
last I will speak of it. What you don't know and don't need to know is that
there is more going on here than basic IIS limitations.
Jon
On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 10:25:08 -0700, Jon Davis
<jo*@REMOVE.ME. PLEASE.jondavis .netwrote:
>Can you document the claim that "IIS 'self-tunes' itself
and avoids taking up more than roughly one quarter of the available
physical RAM"?
>
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...b70352baa.mspx
There is nothing in that document that suggests IIS limits itself to 1/4
of available RAM. As far as "tuning" more generally goes, you'll note (I
hope) that part of the tuning that goes on is IIS ensuring that it doesn't
starve other processes of memory. Your proposed change to your setup
involves essentially doing just that, perhaps even starving IIS.
>This means nothing. If you are running 32-bit Windows, with 4GB of RAM
it is absolutely normal for an application to not be able to allocate
any
more memory even while physical RAM has 1GB or more available.
That's not true; a standalone app can and will allocate RAM and will
begin using available virtual memory when unreserved physical RAM is no
longer
available.
Wrong. And until you correct your misunderstandin g of the memory
management model used by Windows, you are going to continue trying to
solve your problem the wrong way.
Quick summary (applies to 32-bit Windows, same principles apply -- mostly
-- to 64-bit Windows, but of course the actual limits are vastly higher):
* ALL memory allocations in a process go through virtual memory. ALL
of them. A normal application (this would include your service) under
Windows does not get to allocate physical RAM directly. The first part of
any memory allocation involves allocating a chunk of virtual address
space, whether or not there is sufficient physical RAM to satisfy that
allocation.
* The virtual address space for 32-bit pointers is theoretically 4GB,
but because of the way that Windows uses those pointers, only half of this
is available to the process directly (up to 3GB with a special switch
booting the OS). Thus, no process can EVER allocate more than 2GB.
Because of fragmentation, most processes will find themselves limited to
maximum total allocations somewhat less than 2GB. The larger the
individual blocks the process is trying to allocate, the more likely this
will be a problem.
* When a process references a virtual address that hasn't been
"committed" , at that point physical RAM is assigned to the virtual
address. But since a process cannot address more than 2GB of virtual
address space, the process can never reference more than 2GB of physical
RAM as well. In reality, a process almost never has their entire virtual
allocation committed, and so physical RAM usage is almost always less (and
usually considerably less) than their total virtual memory allocation.
IIS is FAR more likely to throw OutOfMemoryExce ptions than a
standalone app. I may not be a world-class developer yet but 10 years of
experience with developing both IIS apps and Windows apps gives me
enough to go on.
It's apparent from your lack of understanding of the Windows memory
management model that that's not true. You need to accumulate at least a
little more experience before you have "enough to go on".
IIS memory utilization in itself is not the issue here.
Then you have asked your question incorrectly. In all of your posts, how
IIS uses memory is a central part of your complaint. If IIS memory
utilization is not the issue, then I recommend you stop including it in
your queries.
The issue is we have a process that we have a large process that we've
decided will be
implemented as a Windows service and that will be accessible by multiple
web apps.
As near as I can tell, the reason you've decided to implement it as a
Windows service is that you believe you can get around the memory
allocation issues by doing so. The problem is that you can't. The same
memory allocation issues that restrict IIS will also restrict you.
Pete This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics | |
by: Tertius Cronje |
last post by:
Hi All,
Q: Is it possible for a thread on SocketServer.ThreadingTCPServer to get
the socket info of *other* open thread/s and use that info to send data
to the accepting client?
I wrote a socketserver using SocketServer.ThreadingTCPServer. A client
is connected to the server and expects multiple request/responses. (Not
sure about the terminology but the client connects and then stay
connected for a while.)
|
by: Thierry Marneffe |
last post by:
Hello
Suppose a database Db1 with tables tl1 and tl2 and a second database db2
with tables tl3 et tl4.
Is it possible to make a join between tables of the two databases ?
As for example, Select * from tl1 INNER JOIN tl3 where tl1.Field1 =
tl3.Field3
|
by: David M. Karr |
last post by:
I've been asked to help debug a complex problem involving inter-frame
references, so I just want to understand the elements involved with
this.
Apparently, there is a page with multiple frames, where one of the
frames is a "hidden" frame, and is there just to contain one or more
"fields" that are referenced from other frames.
Supposedly, if a user "sits" somewhere in this set of pages for
several minutes and then tries to do...
|
by: Bern McCarty |
last post by:
I have run an experiment to try to learn some things about floating point
performance in managed C++. I am using Visual Studio
2003. I was hoping to get a feel for whether or not it would make sense to
punch out from managed code to native code (I was using
IJW) in order to do some amount of floating point work and, if so, what that
certain amount of floating point work was
approximately.
To attempt to do this I made a program that...
|
by: les |
last post by:
Here's a class which uses 2.0 generics to implement an inter-thread
message queue in C#. Any number of threads can post and read from the
queue simultaneously, and the message object can be any type.
There's a test driver at the bottom which demonstrates usage.
/*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
| | |
by: Sumedh |
last post by:
Hi everyone
There is a C# project which calls C++/CLI dll to be able to call
native C++ including templates. But the C++/CLI code itself also
requires the C# dll to get the types. For example:
C#:
class Test1
{
|
by: Laurence |
last post by:
Hi folks,
As I konw: database partition (aka data partition?), the database can
span multiple machines; table partition, the data within a table can
seperate by certain condition.
How about inter-partition and intra-partition? Is inter-partition
database partition...?
|
by: halekio |
last post by:
Hi all,
Please bear with me as I've only started programming in C# 2 weeks ago
and this is my first contact with OOP.
I ran into a situation where I needed to catch an event in an object
that had no connection or reference to the object that triggered it.
It goes something like this: (not syntactically correct..it's just for
the idea)
|
by: rkprasad |
last post by:
I am able to create BASIC-CLEAR-INTEGRATED sql http endpoint and consume it on a LAN. But i am not able to consume the created endpoint on inter domain network. If i create endpoint on a server having live IP and try to access it as http://59.165.20.29/SqlHttpEndPointPath?WSDL from a LAN which has its own proxy then I am not able to access it ; and get HTTP 500/HTTP 501 error in the browser.
In a different way i create an sql http endpoint...
|
by: rsennat |
last post by:
Hi,
what is the order of the libraries in the Makefile, for linking inter dependent libraries. i'm getting linker error for the following scenario.
I have lib1.a and lib2.a, with which lib1.a needs lib2.a and lib2.a needs lib1.a for linking. How can this be resolved.
any thoughts on this would be helpful.
thanks
rsennat
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look !
Part I. Meaning of...
| | |
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it.
First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth.
The Art of Business Website Design
Your website is...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own....
Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
|
by: TSSRALBI |
last post by:
Hello
I'm a network technician in training and I need your help.
I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs.
The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols.
I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
|
by: adsilva |
last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
| | |
by: muto222 |
last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.
|
by: bsmnconsultancy |
last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating effective websites that not only look great but also perform exceptionally well. In this comprehensive...
| |
