
gal.9430 at googlemail
May 23, 2012, 10:49 PM
Post #25 of 44
(1800 views)
Permalink
|
|
Re: Lot of input errors on a NPE-G1 interface
[In reply to]
|
|
Sibbi, No errors on the second interface with LX optic: GigabitEthernet0/2 is up, line protocol is up Hardware is BCM1250 Internal MAC, address is 0006.52f4.d81a (bia 0006.52f4.d81a) MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1000000 Kbit/sec, DLY 10 usec, reliability 255/255, txload 2/255, rxload 1/255 Encapsulation 802.1Q Virtual LAN, Vlan ID 1., loopback not set Keepalive set (10 sec) Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s, link type is autonegotiation, media type is LX output flow-control is XON, input flow-control is XON ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00 Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never Last clearing of "show interface" counters never Input queue: 0/75/1018/467 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0 Queueing strategy: fifo Output queue: 0/40 (size/max) 5 minute input rate 6692000 bits/sec, 1543 packets/sec 5 minute output rate 8629000 bits/sec, 2402 packets/sec 240944267 packets input, 764868435 bytes, 20 no buffer Received 665 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored 0 watchdog, 8 multicast, 0 pause input 0 input packets with dribble condition detected 307328333 packets output, 3150334452 bytes, 0 underruns 5 output errors, 0 collisions, 4 interface resets 0 unknown protocol drops 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred 5 lost carrier, 0 no carrier, 0 pause output 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out It is a good time to start with a layer-1 diagnostic and change the optics. On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Sigurbjörn Birkir Lárusson <sigurbjornl [at] vodafone> wrote: > Similar traffic on the other port I assume, outbound port for the router? > No input errors there? > > If you also see input errors and overruns on the other port, the CPU is > probably having issues emptying the buffer before it runs out of buffer > space which would suggest high CPU usage during the times when the > overruns are occuring.  Then you should look at why that is the case, it's > not enough traffic to really cause that issue, but you might have other > features enabled that are causing the box to use a lot of cpu. > > If there are no errors on the other port, it's more likely that this is a > layer 1 problem, and you should try replacing the optics if you have > spares or cleaning the existing ones > > Kind regards, > Sibbi > > On 23.5.2012 21:24, "gal.9430 [at] googlemail" <gal.9430 [at] googlemail> > wrote: > >>> Are you getting bursts of traffic that might not register on traffic >>>graphs polling at 5 minute intervals? >> >>No, I don't think so. Burst traffic never exceeds 80-100 Mbps. We're >>polling in a 1 min interval. >> >> >>On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Edward Salonia >><Edward.Salonia [at] ipsoft> wrote: >>> Drops and overruns... Sounds like you are overloading your port buffer. >>>Are you getting bursts of traffic that might not register on traffic >>>graphs polling at 5 minute intervals? >>> >>> - Ed >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces [at] puck >>>[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of >>>gal.9430 [at] googlemail >>> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 5:00 PM >>> To: Sigurbjörn Birkir Lárusson >>> Cc: cisco-nsp [at] puck >>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Lot of input errors on a NPE-G1 interface >>> >>>> Is this the only traffic going through this 7200? >>> >>> No. Gi0/1 is connected via 2960G to another router (iBGP). Gi0/2 is >>> connected to an eBGP peer >>> who sends a full table. >>> >>>> How is your scheduler allocate set on the 7200... >>> >>> Default value, not changed. >>> >>>> ...have you tried a new cable and cleaning the optics? >>> >>> New cable: yes >>> Cleaning the optics: no >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Sigurbjörn Birkir Lárusson >>> <sigurbjornl [at] vodafone> wrote: >>>> Is this the only traffic going through this 7200? >>>> >>>> How is your scheduler allocate set on the 7200, have you tried a new >>>>cable >>>> and cleaning the optics? >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Sibbi >>>> >>>> On 23.5.2012 19:33, "gal.9430 [at] googlemail" <gal.9430 [at] googlemail> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi, >>>>> >>>>>thanks all for the input. >>>>> >>>>>Increasing the hold-queue (from default to 100) doesn't seem to help at >>>>>all: >>>>> >>>>>GigabitEthernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up >>>>>  Hardware is BCM1250 Internal MAC, address is 0006.52f4.d81b (bia >>>>>0006.52f4.d81b) >>>>>  Internet address is x.x.x.x/28 >>>>>  MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1000000 Kbit/sec, DLY 10 usec, >>>>>   reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 2/255 >>>>>  Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set >>>>>  Keepalive set (10 sec) >>>>>  Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s, link type is autonegotiation, media type is SX >>>>>  output flow-control is XON, input flow-control is XON >>>>>  ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00 >>>>>  Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never >>>>>  Last clearing of "show interface" counters 02:17:11 >>>>>  Input queue: 0/100/742/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output >>>>>drops: 0 >>>>>  Queueing strategy: fifo >>>>>  Output queue: 0/40 (size/max) >>>>>  5 minute input rate 10536000 bits/sec, 1824 packets/sec >>>>>  5 minute output rate 6813000 bits/sec, 2121 packets/sec >>>>>   11770910 packets input, 2922271410 bytes, 0 no buffer >>>>>   Received 215 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles >>>>>   341 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 341 overrun, 0 ignored >>>>>   0 watchdog, 4242 multicast, 0 pause input >>>>>   0 input packets with dribble condition detected >>>>>   14975201 packets output, 1820911878 bytes, 0 underruns >>>>>   0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets >>>>>   137 unknown protocol drops >>>>>   0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred >>>>>   0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier, 0 pause output >>>>>   0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out >>>>> >>>>>Will go from 100 to 150 and see whats happen. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Phil Mayers <p.mayers [at] imperial> >>>>>wrote: >>>>>> On 05/23/2012 08:18 PM, Chris Gotstein wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> %Warning: portfast should only be enabled on ports connected to a >>>>>>>single >>>>>>> host. Connecting hubs, concentrators, switches, bridges, etcŠto >>>>>>>this >>>>>>> interface when portfast is enabled, can cause temporary bridging >>>>>>>loops. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My understanding of this was a router would be included as well >>>>>>>since >>>>>>> it's used to connect multiple hosts. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If you don't enable portfast, you have to suffer the STP state >>>>>>transitions, >>>>>> which lead to delays in traffic forwarding after link-up. >>>>>> >>>>>> Portfast basically means: "This port is unlikely to be connected to >>>>>>another >>>>>> bridge or hub, so skip the LISTENING/LEARNING transitions and jump >>>>>>straight >>>>>> to forwarding; if it goes wrong, STP will close the loop shortly." >>>>>> >>>>>> It's not magic; and it should be enabled on all host ports. Routers >>>>>>are >>>>>> hosts, at layer2. >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp [at] puck >>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>>>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >>>>> >>>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>>cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp [at] puck >>>>>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>>>>archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp [at] puck >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
|