[c-nsp] Cleaning fibre reduces latency ??

[kevin gannon]

The controllers are clean on both ends which is what had me confused.

Regards
Kevin

On 8/10/06, jp <jp at saucer.midcoast.com> wrote:
>
> I presume you mean round-trip latency. If the dirty connection was on
> the transmit side, there would be no errors at the sending end, just at
> the far end or intermediate hardware. The local receive would be a
> different fiber patch that was clean, thus show no errors.
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 10:49:58AM +0100, kevin gannon wrote:
> > We had a problem on our network where we have 2 STM4's run over the same
> > fibre and DWDM equipment. The 2 STM's terminate on identical 7606's. One
> > ran at 5ms and another at 12ms without load.
> >
> > There were no transmission errors seen or no errors on a "show controls
> pos
> > x/y".
> > On cleaning the fibres into the router with the higher latency it seem
> to
> > fix the
> > issue. A hard loop with a different cable showed a the latency to be
> normal.
> >
> > Anyone have any idea what might have caused this given we saw no errors
> > on the controller ?
> >
> > Thanks & Regards
> > Kevin
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
>
> --
> /*
> Jason Philbrook   |   Midcoast Internet Solutions - Internet Access,
>     KB1IOJ        |  Hosting, and TCP-IP Networks for Midcoast Maine
> http://f64.nu/   |             http://www.midcoast.com/
> */
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>