RE: [nsp] 12008 problems sending packets?

From: chester@corp.thrunet.com
Date: Sun Aug 13 2000 - 23:05:26 EDT


Problem happen when dot1Q tagging on GE with ios12.0(7)S,12.0(9)S,12.0(11)S

12.0(10)S1 has no TTL problem.

-mansu kim

-----Original Message-----
From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swmike@swm.pp.se]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 11:14 AM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [nsp] 12008 problems sending packets?

I'm having a "cosmetic" problem with a 12008, it won't respond to
TTL-expired-in-transit properly. Everything else works just fine.

System image file is "slot0:gsr-p-mz.120-9.S"

cisco 12008/GRP (R5000) processor (revision 0x05) with 131072K bytes of
memory.
R5000 CPU at 200Mhz, Implementation 35, Rev 2.1, 512KB L2 Cache
Last reset from power-on

1 four-port OC3 POS controller (4 POS).
1 Single Port Gigabit Ethernet/IEEE 802.3z controller (1 GigabitEthernet).

The router is running OSPF and BGP. It has two full BGP feeds (one
IBGP and one EBGP) plus ca 15 EBGP-peerings. It has a static
default-route. The GE interface has 3 subinterfaces (dot1q encap). It has
no (sub)interface ip access-lists.

Tracerouting through it I get:

 1 xx.xx.133.62 0.703 ms 0.477 ms 0.466 ms
 2 * * *
 3 xx.xx.159.37 8.416 ms 8.237 ms 8.207 ms
 4 xx.xx.158.9 12.671 ms 12.425 ms 12.387 ms

The GSR is hop 2 here. I am coming in thru the gigabit interface and going
out one POS interface.

Going back, coming in via the POS interface and going out the GE
interface (from 158.9):

  1 xx.xx.158.10 4 msec 4 msec 8 msec
  2 xx.xx.159.38 12 msec 12 msec 12 msec
  3 xx.xx.156.12 12 msec 12 msec 12 msec

Going in one GE subinterface and coming out another yealds the same * * *
result. I have no problem what so ever to ping/traceroute from the router
itself to anywhere so it seems that is has no problems generating "normal"
packets itself, just these traceroute ICMP messages seems to be wrong.

We started getting these problems when we added the GE subinterfaces,
before that it worked just fine. The router has not been reloaded since we
added the subinterfaces. I have thought of doing this but reloading a
router to solve a problem like this is not what I want :/

I have been told that this is somewhat of a known problem, I just havent
heard any solution to it :/

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:15 EDT