[c-nsp] Cisco 1720 and ip cef
Rodney Dunn
rodunn at cisco.com
Fri Sep 24 09:32:01 EDT 2004
I think you can do it either way:
75xx_#sh ip cef 6.6.6.1
6.6.6.0/24, version 50, epoch 0, per-destination sharing
0 packets, 0 bytes
via 1.1.1.1, 0 dependencies, recursive
traffic share 1
next hop 1.1.1.1, FastEthernet4/0/0 via 1.1.1.1/32 (Default)
valid adjacency
via 14.24.1.1, 0 dependencies, recursive
traffic share 1
next hop 14.24.1.1, FastEthernet4/1/0 via 14.24.1.1/32 (Default)
valid adjacency
0 packets, 0 bytes switched through the prefix
tmstats: external 0 packets, 0 bytes
internal 0 packets, 0 bytes
75xx_#sh ip cef 6.6.6.1 int
6.6.6.0/24, version 50, epoch 0, per-destination sharing
0 packets, 0 bytes
via 1.1.1.1, 0 dependencies, recursive
traffic share 1
next hop 1.1.1.1, FastEthernet4/0/0 via 1.1.1.1/32 (Default)
valid adjacency (0x42CB5A20)
via 14.24.1.1, 0 dependencies, recursive
traffic share 1
next hop 14.24.1.1, FastEthernet4/1/0 via 14.24.1.1/32 (Default)
valid adjacency (0x42CB5CE0)
0 packets, 0 bytes switched through the prefix
tmstats: external 0 packets, 0 bytes
internal 0 packets, 0 bytes
Load distribution: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 (refcount 1)
Hash OK Interface Address Packets
1 Y FastEthernet4/0/0 1.1.1.1 0
2 Y FastEthernet4/1/0 14.24.1.1 0
3 Y FastEthernet4/0/0 1.1.1.1 0
4 Y FastEthernet4/1/0 14.24.1.1 0
that was for a /24 6.6.6.0 subnet.
75xx_#sh ip ro 6.6.6.1
Routing entry for 6.6.6.0/24
Known via "static", distance 1, metric 0
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 1.1.1.1
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
14.24.1.1
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 01:50:58PM +0100, Dale.Francis at barclayscapital.com wrote:
> Rodney,
>
> For point d) and the sh ip cef 0.0.0.0 internal, should the mask not
> accompany this entry to get he hash table.???
>
> Eg:
>
> Router#sh ip cef 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 inter
> 0.0.0.0/0, version 136, per-destination sharing
> 0 packets, 0 bytes
> via 30.255.1.86, Vlan721, 0 dependencies
> traffic share 1
> next hop 30.255.1.86, Vlan721
> valid adjacency
> via 30.255.1.82, Vlan720, 0 dependencies
> traffic share 1
> next hop 30.255.1.82, Vlan720
> valid adjacency
>
> 0 packets, 0 bytes switched through the prefix
> tmstats: external 0 packets, 0 bytes
> internal 0 packets, 0 bytes
> Load distribution: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 (refcount 1)
>
> Hash OK Interface Address Packets
> 1 Y Vlan721 30.255.1.86 0
> 2 Y Vlan720 30.255.1.82 0
> 3 Y Vlan721 30.255.1.86 0
> 4 Y Vlan720 30.255.1.82 0
> 5 Y Vlan721 30.255.1.86 0
> 6 Y Vlan720 30.255.1.82 0
> 7 Y Vlan721 30.255.1.86 0
> 8 Y Vlan720 30.255.1.82 0
> 9 Y Vlan721 30.255.1.86 0
> 10 Y Vlan720 30.255.1.82 0
> 11 Y Vlan721 30.255.1.86 0
> 12 Y Vlan720 30.255.1.82 0
> 13 Y Vlan721 30.255.1.86 0
> 14 Y Vlan720 30.255.1.82 0
> 15 Y Vlan721 30.255.1.86 0
> 16 Y Vlan720 30.255.1.82 0
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Rodney Dunn
> Sent: 24 September 2004 13:31
> To: Nigel
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 1720 and ip cef
>
>
> We need to see:
>
> a) the configuration
> b) show ip route
> c) show ip cef
> d) if you are using a default route out we
> need you to enable:
> ip cef accounting load
> and do 'sh ip cef 0.0.0.0 int' a couple of times.
>
> Rodney
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 10:49:53AM +1000, Nigel wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I am running into some trouble regarding the cisco 1720 and ip cef
> > load balancing.
> >
> > The router has 2 adsl wics in it. Each dsl connection is 1.5M/256.
> >
> > The problem is that on the outbound path the traffic is only ever
> > going out 1 specific wic. I have tried forcing cef to per packet in
> > order to push traffic out both interfaces, but this still results in
> > traffic only going out the 1 interface still. If I shutdown the
> > interface that is passing outbound traffic the router drops of the
> > network completely.
> >
> > The inbound traffic comes down both wics. So far the ios has been
> > upgraded to 12.3(10) and the wic has been swapped out. Neither has
> > made a difference.
> >
> > It leaves the actual wic slot on the 1720 or the possibility that the
> > 1720 just can't deal with load balancing.
> >
> > Here are the outputs from the interfaces:
> >
> > Router#sho int atm0 | inc rate
> > Queueing strategy: Per VC Queueing
> > 5 minute input rate 112000 bits/sec, 38 packets/sec
> > 5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
> >
> >
> > Router#sho int atm1 | inc rate
> > Queueing strategy: Per VC Queueing
> > 5 minute input rate 110000 bits/sec, 37 packets/sec
> > 5 minute output rate 32000 bits/sec, 98 packets/sec
> >
> >
> > Any ideas at all?
> >
> > Thanks in advanced.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Nigel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > 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.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> For more information about Barclays Capital, please
> visit our web site at http://www.barcap.com.
>
>
> Internet communications are not secure and therefore the Barclays
> Group does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this
> message. Although the Barclays Group operates anti-virus programmes,
> it does not accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever that is
> caused by viruses being passed. Any views or opinions presented are
> solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
> Barclays Group. Replies to this email may be monitored by the Barclays
> Group for operational or business reasons.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list