[nsp] dot1q causes port error?
Stephen J. Wilcox
steve@telecomplete.co.uk
Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:19:46 +0000 (GMT)
Thanks David,
there is non-cisco equipment connecting which is why we run dot1q. I guess we
can run ISL on one port and dot1q on another.
Do you know if this deencaps and reencaps process adds load or if this occurs
anyway in the switching path between two trunk ports? I wouldnt like to do it if
it compromises the efficiency of the switch.
Steve
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Temkin, David wrote:
> I'm positive it's actually a problem with dot1q on the 2924's. 110%
> positive, because I had the same exact issue two weeks ago between a URM
> (3660 on a card) and a 2924 in a remote office.
>
> AFAIK, disabling keepalives doesn't actually make the problem go away - it
> didn't for me. The only fix that worked for me was converting the trunk to
> ISL. It seems pretty obvious from the fact that the counters are exactly
> the same.
>
> I should have looked at the bug before I sent it to you, because it's not
> the same as what's happening here.
>
> First of all, the 35xx series doesn't have the same limitation as the 2924.
> Give it a shot if you can... I'm not sure what kind of production
> environment you run.
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stephen J. Wilcox [mailto:steve@telecomplete.co.uk]
> > Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 2:13 PM
> > To: Temkin, David
> > Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > Subject: RE: [nsp] dot1q causes port error?
> >
> >
> > Hi David,
> > this is actually saying it is a problem in ISL and NOT in
> > dot1q, I have seen a similar reference and have disabled
> > keepalives. THis makes no difference tho, the errors are
> > there as before.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Temkin, David wrote:
> >
> > > It's a known issue caused by keepalives.
> > >
> > > See bug CSCdr22809
> > >
> > > It's a hardware limitation on the switch. The router sends
> > keepalives
> > > untagged and the switch can't deal with it.
> > >
> > > Convert the trunk to ISL and they will go away. I promise. :-)
> > >
> > > -Dave
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Stephen J. Wilcox [mailto:steve@telecomplete.co.uk]
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 2:00 PM
> > > > To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > > > Subject: [nsp] dot1q causes port error?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I've a Cat2924-XL-EN (c2900XL-c3h2s-mz-120.5.2-XU.bin)
> > > > connecting to a 7200 with IO-FE (c7200-js-mz.122-8.T5)
> > > >
> > > > I'm running dot1q on them and seeing errors. I'm sure theres
> > > > no cable fault and have replicated this with different
> > > > hardware. I'm unable to find anything in the bug toolkit
> > > > (which doesnt appear to support IOS for switches very well)
> > > > and google showed nothing useful either.
> > > >
> > > > ANyone else seen this and perhaps knows the problem?
> > > >
> > > > relevant counters (no others show error)
> > > >
> > > > Switch:
> > > > Received 89 broadcasts, 1698991 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
> > > > 1819995 input errors, 121004 CRC, 0 frame, 44 overrun,
> > > > 132 ignored
> > > >
> > > > Router:
> > > > 16687740 packets output, 3005655898 bytes, 299991 underruns
> > > > 299991 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets
> > > >
> > > > Note the errors occur in the direction router to switch.
> > > >
> > > > Also, pinging the switch or devices beyond the switch doesnt
> > > > appear to produce any packet loss that ought to be associated
> > > > to errored frames
> > > >
> > > > Any thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > Steve
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > cisco-nsp mailing list real_name)s@puck.nether.net
> > > > http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-> nsp
> > > > archive at
> > > > http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > IMPORTANT:The information contained in this email and/or its
> > > attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
> > > please notify the sender immediately by reply and
> > immediately delete
> > > this message and all its attachments. Any review, use,
> > reproduction,
> > > disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an
> > > unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this
> > message nor
> > > any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer,
> > > solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other
> > > financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her
> > employer nor any
> > > of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the
> > > completeness or accuracy of any of the information
> > contained herein or
> > > that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> IMPORTANT:The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is
> confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
> sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its
> attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of
> this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly
> prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or
> should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or
> sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or
> her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as
> to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein
> or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
>
>
>