50E/51E

[micahawitt]

Anyone have one of these yet?  Looking to upgrade from a 40C.

A little skeptical with this new line, I don't want another 60C type product on my hands here...

Just looking to see reviews, stable, good, bad, ugly....

[seferkayar · Accepted solution]

cryptochrome wrote:

I've been using a 51E for the last couple of weeks and while I am generally happy, I had a few occasions where the box entered conserve mode. Even though we only have very few users here (less than 5), but we always have between 1000 and 1500 sessions. I am not sure whether this could be a bug in FortiOS 5.4.0 (memory leak?) or whether 2 GB of RAM are just not enough.

Hi

FortiOS 5.4.1 has been released. I see that it is released on 8th June. There is a resolved bug about entering conserve mode as below. It may be your occasion.

Service : FSSO

Bug ID :302908

Smbcd continuously requests for memory; this causes the system to enter conserve mode.

[bartman10 · Accepted solution]

Oook.. Why would you down vote facts! Fact is they shipped a product with a major feature not even working! Screwed me around for months with bullS@##$ gathering logs and playing with level 1-2 support. If you had spent the months fighting with support about this while they make you feel like you are the only one in the world having this problem only to find out they know about it.. you'd maybe have a slightly different opinion of the situation. So yes.. all the while I've got a project in remote office that is behind schedule because I have a defective firewall. Sent back that untested junk and got a 60D.

BTW.. my ticket is still open with support.. let me ping the guy and ask if it's resolved yet. Last time I asked, 5-20, it was still not.

So down vote me all you want! I've come on here as a service to other users to prevent them from having to go through what I went through with FN support. I can't even imagine why anyone would down vote that.. but what ever. 

[simonorch]

If this is a firmware rather than hardware issue then i'm not too worried right now as 5.4 should not be used in production at all.

[FGTuser]

simonorch wrote:

as 5.4 should not be used in production at all.

Totally agree. But 50E/51E is 5.4 only, so no choice in this case.

It's hard to understand there is no 5.2 release for these new boxes.

[storaid]

OndrejD wrote:

simonorch wrote:

as 5.4 should not be used in production at all.

Totally agree. But 50E/51E is 5.4 only, so no choice in this case.

It's hard to understand there is no 5.2 release for these new boxes.

agreed..

NO CHOICE...!

there is no v5.2 f/w for E-series box, I don't understand why fortinet must keep v5.4 for E-series box..

[cryptochrome]

storaid wrote:

there is no v5.2 f/w for E-series box, I don't understand why fortinet must keep v5.4 for E-series box..

May be a driver issue or something similar. Maybe the newer hardware needs OS components that are only in the new OS code and it's just not worth it to backport them.

[bartman10]

Tried a 2nd beta firmware from engineering they said fixes the issue and was going to be given to all FWF-50E users.. well I installed it an 2-3 hours later unit locks up again. Wife said internet stopped. I started pinging default gateway.

C:\Windows\System32>ping 192.168.1.1

Pinging 192.168.1.1 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=554ms TTL=64 Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=831ms TTL=64 Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=462ms TTL=64 Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=475ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.1.1: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 462ms, Maximum = 831ms, Average = 580ms

C:\Windows\System32>ping 192.168.1.1

Pinging 192.168.1.1 with 32 bytes of data: Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 192.168.1.1: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),

C:\Windows\System32>ping 192.168.1.1

Pinging 192.168.1.1 with 32 bytes of data: Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 192.168.1.1: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),

C:\Windows\System32>ping 192.168.1.1

Pinging 192.168.1.1 with 32 bytes of data: Request timed out. Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=193ms TTL=64 Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=231ms TTL=64 Reply from 192.168.1.1: bytes=32 time=275ms TTL=64

Oh ya doods.. that looks good, ship that! 

So on top of "how the hell did they ship a WiFi unit that when you use said WiFi the unit locks up", you have to ask.. after over a month of having this open they still can't seem to get it working. TAC L3 says they can reproduce the issue now... so I only assume they loaded up a cat video on youtube and when it played they called it a day and went home.

Well.. I'm done with the free QA for Fortinet.. My RMA number finally came through and this thing is going back in the morning. Good luck fixing it.. not like I haven't tried and bent over backwards to force them to recognize this issue in the first place.

[Alex_l]

Hi, All! I moved to 50E from 60D. New device is a lot of times more faster. Using torrents at 100mbit all sec. features including SSL inspection CPU usage not more 15-20%! Fortigate is champ in small UTM devicec! Fg-60D always have freeze with 100% CPU during just heavy web page open.

[seferkayar]

Hi Guys,

What is the number of users in where you tested 50E? Its performance values are like 80D's. Do you think it can be used instead of 80D?

[FGTuser]

seferkayar wrote:

Hi Guys,

What is the number of users in where you tested 50E? Its performance values are like 80D's. Do you think it can be used instead of 80D?

I'm planning to use 51E boxes instead of anything under 100D. But no production experience yet...

Waiting for new customer and FortiOS 5.4.1...

Especially I don't see any reason to buy more expensive/less powerful 80D (except very special cases).

Just take 51E with SSD, not 50E.

[Alex_l]

seferkayar wrote:

Hi Guys,

What is the number of users in where you tested 50E? Its performance values are like 80D's. Do you think it can be used instead of 80D?

AT home 3-4 PC/notebook. No any delay been seen.

Regardless 80D/50E I think better take 50E series as more new model what will have more lifecycles long. Especially then price for FG-60D was 460USD and for 50E was at hundred below - just 360USD. Amazing price/quality for home soho users. SoC is good for stanle common services - routing, switching, IPSec. For UTM load - not very as seen :)

[FGTuser]

Alexey_L wrote:

Hi, All! I moved to 50E from 60D. New device is a lot of times more faster. Using torrents at 100mbit all sec. features including SSL inspection CPU usage not more 15-20%! Fortigate is champ in small UTM devicec! Fg-60D always have freeze with 100% CPU during just heavy web page open.

Yes, when you move from SoC box to CPU box and using UTM, it's different universe.