[c-nsp] NPE-400 vs. NPE-G1

Hank Nussbacher hank at efes.iucc.ac.il
Sun Feb 5 03:09:16 EST 2006

At 10:59 AM 05-02-06 +0300, Roman Sokolov wrote:
>Hello £ukasz,
>Sunday, February 5, 2006, 1:13:11 AM, you wrote:
>£B> First of all, You may hit something that requires slow CPU path,
>£B> but I'd doubt this is the point with the configuration You attached,
>£B> however reaching 100% of CPU usage is something really suspicious.
>I agree. There is definitely something else configured on interface or in
>other part of config. Some strange access-lists of NetFlow, for example.
>£B> Second thing is, if DFC-enabled card is receiving traffic and
>£B> the destination lies on the not-DFC linecard, there's always some
>£B> overhead in terms of shared bus and PFC usage. Was this the case in
>£B> the example You provided?
>I think that when you use DFC and destination if CEF720-enabled module than
>there should be no bus usage at all. Or only for netflow packets (i'm not
>sure where then being sent to SP).

interface GigabitEthernet9/43
  ip access-group IIX-DOS in
  ip route-cache flow
  load-interval 30
  flowcontrol receive desired

>£B> And last but not least, there's always CoPP ;)
>And you should always use it :)

We'll try.


>Best regards,
>  Roman
>  mailto:rps at cheater.ru
>  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System
>  at the Tel-Aviv University CC.

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list