Agentless method taking 1,000kb+ per second bandwidth
Posted 21 January 2008 - 10:16 AM
Any solution to this?
Posted 22 January 2008 - 10:36 AM
Anyway, I forgot to say it's 1,000kb+ per sec. both ways, not just down or up. So that's 2,000kb+ total bandwidth and again, that's only around 5 PCs. I'd hate to see what scanning 20 or more at a time would do.
Posted 24 January 2008 - 11:58 AM
You are right about the huge traffic for agent-free method. We have conducted a couple of tests and found out the following: the reason for such traffic is gathering of information about installed software. Moreover, most traffic is going from admin computer to the scanned workstation.
For example, we've scanned a Win2000 machine with about 50 items in Uninstall section of the registry, and it took 2.8/4.0/6.9 (down/up/total; traffic meter was installed on client machine) MB of traffic only for installed software. The whole scan took 3.0/4.9/8.0 MB. Scan time was 01:51, so you can count average bandwidth usage, though it has really ragged rate.
For a WinXP machine with around 300 "Uninstall" items the total traffic was 58.2/9.0/67.2 MB, while installed software took 57.3/3.3/60.5 MB of them, and all other information took only 0.8/5.6/6.4 MB. Scan time was 02:21.
There is a very little chance that it can be optimized with usage of WMI technology, because this traffic is generated by its calls. I can advise to disable "Installed software" and "Antivirus software" in "File - Options - Inventory" and thus don't collect this information, if the traffic is an issue.
Or you should use agent method. For the same WinXP machine it took only 1.4/0.1/1.6 MB for the first time, and if you have "Keep deployed filed" option enabled in "Options - Connection", then the second and all other times will be around 0.1/0.1/0.2 MB (118/122/240 KB), and this is of course with all inventory categories enabled. You can see the difference is staggering, so agent method is a real option for traffic-sensitive applications.
Posted 24 January 2008 - 12:45 PM
Yes, I notice the agent method takes less bandwidth. Although on many computers, at least on a LAN, it seems agentless is faster than using the agent. I don't get that.
With all the problems with agentless, it sounds like the agent method is the way to go, don't you think?
Posted 25 January 2008 - 02:51 AM
Posted 27 January 2008 - 07:03 PM
Posted 28 January 2008 - 03:12 AM
Posted 30 January 2008 - 01:44 AM
Posted 31 January 2008 - 09:41 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users