FW: [c-nsp] Cisco Gigabit EthernetSwitch Module (CGESM)fortheHPBladeSystem

[David Prall]

Christian,
What are you running on the servers. Cisco switches default to IGMPv2.
Windows XP had some major issues because they default to IGMPv3 and don't
fall back to IGMPv2 when they find an IGMPv2 router. So your multicast could
be flooding. Confirm that the router is configured for IGMPv3 and that the
switch is as well.

David

--
David C Prall dcp at dcptech.com http://dcp.dcptech.com
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net 
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
> christian.macnevin at uk.bnpparibas.com
> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 7:52 AM
> To: ltd at cisco.com
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: FW: [c-nsp] Cisco Gigabit EthernetSwitch Module 
> (CGESM)fortheHPBladeSystem
> 
> These are potential multicast sources. If we have sources 
> multicasting 
> above 100 Mb, then we need to have
> all the sinks running gig as well. And we're not ready for 
> that (would 
> just give the devs an excuse to design their software
> even less efficiently).
> 
> The buffer overflow is occurring on both switches in the 
> enclosure, and 
> it's happening with only 1.15Mb of mcast traffic.
> BADNESS.
> 
> Did anyone who's deployed these test them very much? I'm 
> really not one 
> for this 'it just works' stuff...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Internet
> ltd at cisco.com
> 10/10/2005 11:26
> 
> To
> Christian MACNEVIN
> cc
> cisco-nsp
> Subject
> Re: FW: [c-nsp] Cisco Gigabit Ethernet Switch   Module 
> (CGESM)fortheHPBladeSystem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can't help you on support but ...
> 
> regarding your first question, the internal ports are 
> 10/100/1000.  why
> would the 'internal' ports be negotiating 100 Mbps and not GbE?
> if the individual blades are only capable of 100 Mbps (not 
> sure if that
> is the case or not..), then are you saying that 
> 'auto-negotiate' on both
> sides (blade & switch) isn't doing the right thing?
> 
> regarding your second question, many 'blade centre' chassis, there are
> significant heat dissipation & power restrictions on what can be used.
> i believe this is the most significant factor in the choice of what
> model switch was used.
> 
> 
> cheers,
> 
> lincoln.
> 
> cheers,
> 
> lincoln.
> 
> christian.macnevin at uk.bnpparibas.com wrote:
> > It now seems that our guys testing the CGESMs with the most current
> > feature set are seeing that they don't seem to permit
> > manual config of 100/full (and subsequently negotiate down 
> to half in 
> many
> > cases) and they're seeing nasty buffer overruns.
> >
> > Support doesn't seem to be picking us up here, either.
> >
> > I assume there's no HP people on this list, but why on 
> earth did they
> > chose a 2900 to repackage? These blade enclosures
> > may be used in less than critical arenas by some ISPs, but 
> if I told you
> > the projected number we're looking at over the next year,
> > and the seriousness of the calculations going on, you'd 
> think it was a
> > joke they hadn't taken things a bit more seriously.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Internet
> > nick.nauwelaerts at thomson.com
> > Sent by: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > 05/10/2005 08:26
> >
> > To
> > cisco-nsp
> > cc
> >
> > Subject
> > RE: FW: [c-nsp] Cisco Gigabit Ethernet Switch Module
> > (CGESM)fortheHPBladeSystem
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> >> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Dave Temkin
> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 08:17 PM
> >> To: Kevin Graham
> >> Cc: Olav.Langeland at active24.com; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >> Subject: Re: FW: [c-nsp] Cisco Gigabit Ethernet Switch Module
> >> (CGESM)fortheHPBladeSystem
> >>
> >> I found it's easier to skip spanning tree.  Use etherchannels
> >> from each
> >> switch back to the core (or wherever) for redundancy, and to get
> >> cross-switch redundancy have the servers use fail-on-fault
> >> teaming to fail
> >> over to the other switch (which would then be connected to
> >> your alternate
> >> core switch) in the event of a failure.
> >>
> >
> > Do you run "spanning-tree etherchannel guard misconfig" on your core
> > when you use etherchannel links? Does it work as advertised?
> >
> > // nick
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> >
> >
> >
> > This message and any attachments (the "message") is
> > intended solely for the addressees and is confidential.
> > If you receive this message in error, please delete it and
> > immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with
> > its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole
> > or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet
> > can not guarantee the integrity of this message.
> > BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not
> > therefore be liable for the message if modified.
> >
> > 
> **************************************************************
> ********************************
> >
> > BNP Paribas Private Bank London Branch is authorised
> > by CECEI & AMF and is regulated by the Financial Services
> > Authority for the conduct of its investment business in
> > the United Kingdom.
> >
> > BNP Paribas Securities Services London Branch is authorised
> > by CECEI & AMF and is regulated by the Financial Services
> > Authority for the conduct of its investment business in
> > the United Kingdom.
> >
> > BNP Paribas Fund Services UK Limited is authorised and
> > regulated by the Financial Services Authority
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
>