locked
ATA Center and Gateway Sizing RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi ATA Team,

    We have a forest with one parent domain and two child domains with total 13 DCs.

    Parent domain: 9 DCs. Each child domain has 2DCs.

    We have installed ATA and add only one DC (from parent domain) to be monitored in a production environment. I think the test was successful and we received several alerts.

    Three questions please.

    Q1. As we are going to consider monitoring for all DCs and reinstall the product on new servers, does ATA support a forest with one parent domain and two child domains? Total is 13 DCs.

    Parent domain: 9 DCs. Each child domain has 2DCs.

    Q2. From the capacity planning guide:

    https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/mt429323.aspx

    The ATA Center Sizing is based on total daily average number of packets-per-sec from all DCs but the ATA Gateway Sizing is based on total daily number of packets-per-sec from all DCs. (average is not mentioned here)

    Can I assume that that ATA Gateway Sizing is based on total daily average number of packets-per-sec?

    Q3. If the answer of Q2 is yes, I estimate (for 13 DCs) I'll need:

    • One ATA Gateway server with 64GB RAM, 16 CPU Cores, 2 NICs
    • One ATA Center: 64GB RAM, 8 CPU Cores, with Storage 6.5TB.

    Please confirm if this estimate is correct.

    Many thanks.

    Thursday, February 4, 2016 6:16 AM

All replies

  • Hi Abdullah,



    Regarding Q1) ATA supports multi-domain forests. So the answer is 'yes', as long as all domains are part of one forest, which is the true in your scenario.



    Regarding Q2) As the Gateways are able to queue packets that should be send to the ATA Center, the Centers' size is based on an average. It has to be good enough to let the GWs deliver their information to the Center e.g. after packet spikes. In contrast to the Center, the GWs must be able to perform all incoming packets on the mirror port (with a little queue if needed), therefore it has to be sized for network spikes, too. You can use the ATA PerfMon counters to double check how much queuing is taking place and how to size the GWs and Center. You will then get an overview if your planned hardware can serve the infrastructural requirements.



    HTH, Fabian



    Saturday, February 6, 2016 11:59 AM
  • Thank you Fabian.

    The values of the ATA PerfMon counters are within the accepted range.

    In my case as I am monitoring only one DC and it seem PerfMon will not guide me for my planned HW requirements.

    Actually I built my above estimate based on the packets per second for my DCs and the capacity planning guide:

    https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/mt429323.aspx

    So I would still require Microsoft confirmation for the GW and Center sizing I estimated.

    Appreciate your reply.

    Thanks in advance.

    Abdullah

    Thursday, February 11, 2016 10:03 AM
  • Hi Abdullah,

    I cannot provide any wildcard "yes" for your calculation. If you follow the ATA capacity planning guide, you get a great starting point of what is needed in your environment.

    As the network utilization aginst DCs is a moving target depending of what happens in the target network, I recommend taking PerfMon counters from all DCs and not just one to check if they are in the expected range of network packets.

    When starting the deployment, I recommend adding DC by DC to the Gateways and check how the ATA GW's and ATA Center's performance counters change and if the traffic is the traffic you expected.

    HTH,

    Fabian

    Monday, February 15, 2016 11:44 AM