1 2 Previous Next 13 Replies Latest reply on Oct 14, 2011 2:53 AM by smalldog

    Another Web Gateway Sizing question



      I was surprised that I could not find any information regarding Web Gateway sizing on the McAfee website, so I'm trying my luck on this forum.


      We are considering replacement of an ISA-server in favour of a McAfee Web Gateway.

      Some info... The current (maximum) numbers:

      • 140 req/sec
      • 50-70Mbit throughput
      • 800 users


      What model would you recommend based on these numbers?

        • 1. Re: Another Web Gateway Sizing question



          we have a calculator, but that is an internal tool and not available for public. Usually for a proper sizing you should get assistance from your sales contacts. If you want I can do a quick sizing for you, but for a "final recommendation" I recommend to have an official sizing done.


          Let us know if you want to have me generate a very basic sizing. Please let me know some details about the modules you would like to use.




          • 2. Re: Another Web Gateway Sizing question

            Hello Andre,


            I would appreciate it if you would do a basic calculation for me.

            I understand that this is no official calculation and I will ask our supplier for an official calculation.


            These are the modules we would like to use: Web Filtering, Anti-Malware, Anti-Virus, SSL Scanner.

            • 3. Re: Another Web Gateway Sizing question



              I have calculated with the following values:


              140 req/s


              McAfee Anti-Malware


              The Options you have:


              2x WW1100

              1x WW1900

              1x WG5000


              I would recommend to get one WW1900 or one WG5000 with 4 GB of Memory installed and run the system in MultiProcess mode, which will allow the boxes to run with an average load of approx. 40%, which leaves some room.


              On the WW1100 you will not be able to use MultiProcess mode therefore I would not like to recommend going with these boxes.


              Please note that the above requirements do not include High Availability/Failover. If this is a requirement you need to double the values.


              It is important to understand that my calculation is based on the req/s. The number of users / throughput in MBit results in a significant lower amount of traffic, so my results may be far from the real requirements. Getting the output of some existing log files would help here. I would recommend to get in touch with the Sizing experts :-)


              Please let me know if you need anything else.




              1 of 1 people found this helpful
              • 4. Re: Another Web Gateway Sizing question

                Just for clarification let me show you what I mean with "the results vary".


                140 req/s is the value I have worked with. Our calculations are based on req/s so this should be the most realistic value. We have some algorithms to calculate number of Users or throughput to req/s.


                When I calculate your 800 Users to req/s based on a "high Internet usage" profile the Output it 40 req/s, which means that my recommendation is far too big.

                When I calculate with 50 MBit throughput the result os 640 req/s, which meand my recommendation is far too small.


                That is why I ask you to have one of our Sizing experts do an "official" sizing before considering any orders.




                1 of 1 people found this helpful
                • 5. Re: Another Web Gateway Sizing question

                  Hello Andre,


                  Thanks for your response.


                  Unfortunately I cannot provide you with the logs.

                  Besides that our security policy does not allow this, I am not the administrator of the current proxyserver.


                  The varying results could be due to the use of other protocols like FTP from some clients.

                  Another reason for the bandwidth consumption might be that VPN connections are tunneling through the proxy.


                  I guess that tunneling protocols is possible using a SOCKS service? And it doesn't consume as many resources (CPU/memory) as regular HTTP sessions do?


                  Best regards,



                  • 6. Re: Another Web Gateway Sizing question

                    Hi Frank,


                    yeah right, you can bypass the filtering for HTTP traffic based on destinations, so that Webwasher will only act as a Proxy, not performing any filtering. Besides that there is also a Socks Proxy available which only hands requests from A to B not performing anything else with it, which of course won't take too many resources.


                    I recommend to get in touch with Sales, get yourself an evaluation copy and a technical Sales contact for consulting to discuss your needs. This will make sure you won't get into trouble after taking Webwasher into operation.




                    • 7. Re: Another Web Gateway Sizing question

                      Hi Andre,

                      today we need a McAfee SE or support to calculate a MWG model for customers. Is this a good idea??


                      The sizing calculator would be great when available in the partner portal. :-)


                      Best Regards,


                      • 8. Re: Another Web Gateway Sizing question

                        Hi Thorsten,


                        yes I agree. I think the sizing calculator has been on the partner portal in the past, but has been removed for some reason.


                        Unfortunately I have no clue how to get it back... I do not even know who is resonsible for the partner portal, but I will look around and see if I can find someone.


                        In the meantime, do you still need help on sizing?


                        Actually sales should be the correct contact for a sizing. If you just need an estimate, just forward the details to me.




                        • 9. Re: Another Web Gateway Sizing question

                          Hey Thorsten,


                          I just talked to the guy who originally built the partner-facing sizing calculator. He built it for the Secure Computing partner portal. During the acquisition the Secure Computing partner portal was discarded, and contents were moved to the McAfee partner portal. Unfortunately the sizing calculator was not part of this project :-(


                          I personally do not know the portal at all, but can you maybe have a look if there is a way to contact the group that maintains the portal? If so, I think the best would be to make them aware that this feature is missing but very important for your business. They need to put that into a project and contact the responsible guys over here to generate the sizing calculator.


                          Not sure if there is anything else I can help you with - if so, please let me know.




                          1 2 Previous Next