Hi
I've been testing this setup on our network for a while now and am noticing latency from when an end user clicks to open a file and when it actually appears on their screen. My theory is that the latency is caused by a combination of network latency plus the time taken by the AV to scan.
So, i would like to test by bypassing our network while the AV is scanning files. To do this I have connected a rack mount server directly to 1 port each on our two controller FAS8020, so e0e port from node 1 and e0f port from node 2.
I need a little help in setting up the network.
Initially I was trying to set a 192 IP address on e0e and e0f ports but am not able to, using 'ifconfig e0e 192.168.x.x netmask 255.255.255.0' from each node shell. Each time it reports back 'usage: ifconfig -a | interfaces'.
I'm not sure if this is the correct way of assigning an IP address directly to a port or whether it is possible.
Secondly, i have taken a different approach by creating a single mode ifgrp on both e0e and e0f port and created a broadcast domain from both ifgrps. I've then created a lif on an SVM that is serving data, on the ifgrp that was created using e0e port . So i have an SVM with a lif on a network vlan and a lif on the private 192.168.x.x range.
When i create a AVscanner which will also have a domain IP and a 192.168.x.x private IP, that is added to a scanner pool, how will the avscanner know which of the two networks to use when scanning files. Will it automatically chose the shortest path / shortest hop first in which case the 192.168 network will always win....
If the second method is the correct ways of setting this up it would also mean that if we decide to follow this approach because latency is reduced dramitically, each SVM will require 2 lif, one on a domain vlan and one from the 192.168.x.x range.
Are any of these methods feasible? your help is greatly appreciated.