Which two options can resolve this situation?

A retail customer with a FortiADC HA cluster load balancing five webservers in L7 Full NAT mode is receiving reports of users not able to access their website during a sale event. But for clients that were able to connect, the website works fine.

CPU usage on the FortiADC and the web servers is low, application and database servers are still able to handle more traffic, and the bandwidth utilization is under 30%.

Which two options can resolve this situation? (Choose two.)
A . Change the persistence rule to LB_PERSIS_SSL_SESSJD.
B . Add more web servers to the real server poof
C . Disable SSL between the FortiADC and the web servers
D . Add a connection-pool to the FortiADC virtual server

View Answer

Answer: BD

Explanation:

Option B: Adding more web servers to the real server pool will increase the overall capacity of the load balancer, which should help to resolve the issue of users not being able to access the website. Option D: Adding a connection-pool to the FortiADC virtual server will allow the load balancer to cache connections to the web servers, which can help to improve performance and reduce the number of dropped connections.

Option A: Changing the persistence rule to LB_PERSIS_SSL_SESSJD would only be necessary if the current persistence rule is not working properly. In this case, the CPU usage on the FortiADC and the web servers is low, so the persistence rule is likely not the issue.

Option C: Disabling SSL between the FortiADC and the web servers would reduce the load on the FortiADC, but it would also make the website less secure. Since the bandwidth utilization is under 30%, it is unlikely that disabling SSL would resolve the issue.

Reference: https://docs.fortinet.com/document/fortiadc/7.2.1/handbook/970956/configuring-virtual-servers