3 Replies Latest reply on Jun 1, 2011 6:59 AM by JoeBidgood

    ePO 4.6 and Agent Handler - what bandwidth is needed?

      Hi Guys,

       

      I wonder ifyou could help, have experience or point me in right direction to implement ePO4.6 infrastructure.

       

      Wecurrently use ePO 4.0 Patch 7 and this server manages 5600 clients at 66 sites.Most of the sites have at least 2mbits connection to the server over WAN link.

       

      In thisscenario we use two layers infrastructure:

       

      ePO server ->local site ePO repository -> client

       

      At themoment this infrastructure is not causing any network impact to our sites but soonwe will upgrade to ePO 4.6 and would like to use Agent Handler.

       

      We wouldlike to have ePO 4.6 server and 6 Agent Handlers at the sites with highest bandwidth. Our problem is now… what is the minimum bandwidth required fromAgent Handler to ePO server over the WAN?

       

      Forexample:

       

      AgentHandler on site “A” with 728 clients. The site has a link of 34mbit to ePOserver. Does anyone know how much link will be constantly used by the AgentHandler?

       

      I know thatit depends from the ASCI – we would like to set up the ASCI interval to 2h, 12times per 24h. From my understanding the calculation is as following:

       

      12 ASCI per24h

      5 eventsper ASCI per client/server x 12 ASCI = 60 events per day per client/server.

      728 clientsx 60 events = 43, 680 events per day

      43,680events / 12 ASCI = 3,640 events per ASCI

       

      Could youadvise me if I calculate correctly? Assuming an single event is not bigger than15kb this would be 53MB of data send from AH to ePO server. Do I think right?

       

      Is thereanother way how to estimate the bandwidth which AH will use all the time to ePOserver?

       

      Pleasehelp!

       

      Any answeris a step ahead!

       

      Thanks alot & regards,

      Pawel

        • 1. Re: ePO 4.6 and Agent Handler - what bandwidth is needed?
          JoeBidgood

          Hi...

           

          Please have a look at the Agent Handler White Paper, which can be found here.

           

          Bottom line is that agent handlers should NEVER be used in an environment where bandwidth or latency is a question. I obviously don't know the full details of your environment, but with this number of clients spread across that many locations, you absolutely do not need to use agent handlers.

           

          A better approach in your environment might be the Lazy Caching feature in MA 4.6, which is due to be released shortly: this allows for more efficient utilisation of bandwidth for updates. But unless there are any other extenuating circumstances, forget about agent handlers

           

          Regards -

           

          Joe

          • 2. Re: ePO 4.6 and Agent Handler - what bandwidth is needed?
            joeleisenlipz

            I have to agree with Joe. With that small number of clients, having additional Agent Handlers is just adding complexity where it isn't needed.

             

            The only justification for an additional AH that I can think of is if your ePO server is completely pressed for resources. I have seen people use a single, central Agent Handler as a way to offload much of the work as an interim solution. This idea can work, but is only a Band-Aid for the ePO server's performance, not network performance.

             

            --Joel E.

            • 3. Re: ePO 4.6 and Agent Handler - what bandwidth is needed?
              JoeBidgood
              The only justification for an additional AH that I can think of is if your ePO server is completely pressed for resources. I have seen people use a single, central Agent Handler as a way to offload much of the work as an interim solution. This idea can work, but is only a Band-Aid for the ePO server's performance, not network performance.

               

              The other scenario where an AH is useful is if you have NATed client machines that connect into a DMZ - you can put an AH in the DMZ and the clients can talk to it without problems. (Previously this wasn't possible without editing files and playing DNS tricks.)

               

              HTH -

               

              Joe