[c-nsp] Possible memory corruption w/ 12.2(18)S11

Rodney Dunn rodunn at cisco.com
Tue Mar 21 17:37:00 EST 2006 

On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 11:53:46PM +0200, Eugene Vedistchev wrote:
> class-based shaping is something like:
> 
> class-map match-all 115
>   match access-group 115
> <multiple class-map>
> 
> policy-map inbound
>   class 115
>     shape average 1024000 4096 4096
> <multiple class/shape statements>
> 
> FN and Software Advisor states that  class-based shaping exists in 12.0S 
> and 12.2S for 7500.

I just tried to configure it on 12.3(17) code on a 75xx and it worked.

75xx_top#sh policy-map 
  Policy Map ipcos-PL469134-ihpca
    Class PL469134-Platinum
      priority percent 17
    Class PL469134-Gold
      bandwidth percent 33
    Class PL469134-Silver
      bandwidth percent 25

  Policy Map inbound
    Class 115
      shape average 1024000 4096 4096
    Class 116
      shape average 2000000 8000 8000

75xx_top#sh pol
75xx_top#sh policy-map int fas 0/0/0
 FastEthernet0/0/0 

  Service-policy output: inbound

    Class-map: 115 (match-all)
      0 packets, 0 bytes
      5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
      Match: access-group 115
      queue size 0, queue limit 256
      packets output 0, packet drops 0
      tail/random drops 0, no buffer drops 0, other drops 0
      Shape: cir 1024000,  Bc 4096,  Be 4096
        output bytes 0, shape rate 0 bps

    Class-map: 116 (match-all)
      0 packets, 0 bytes
      5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
      Match: access-group 116
      queue size 0, queue limit 500
      packets output 0, packet drops 0
      tail/random drops 0, no buffer drops 0, other drops 0
      Shape: cir 2000000,  Bc 8000,  Be 8000
        output bytes 0, shape rate 0 bps
          
    Class-map: class-default (match-any)
      2 packets, 428 bytes
      5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
      Match: any 
75xx_top#sh ver | incl IOS
IOS (tm) RSP Software (RSP-PV-M), Version 12.3(17), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc2)
75xx_top#


> acl remark in 12.2S within them.

Like I said acl remark is in 12.3/12.4 because I checked that too.


Ignore Feature Navigator for the 75xx. It's almost all wrong unfortunately.

Rodney


> 
> Eugene
> 
> --- Original Message ---
> 
> >On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 09:40:54PM +0200, Eugene Vedistchev wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>acl remark (very important - customers) 
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >That's in 12.3 mainline and 12.4 mainline too:
> >
> >75xx_top(config)#ip access-list ex
> >75xx_top(config)#ip access-list extended ?
> >  <100-199>    Extended IP access-list number
> >  <2000-2699>  Extended IP access-list number (expanded range)
> >  WORD         Access-list name
> >
> >75xx_top(config)#ip access-list extended test
> >75xx_top(config-ext-nacl)#rem
> >75xx_top(config-ext-nacl)#remark ?
> >  LINE  Comment up to 100 characters
> >  <cr>
> >
> >75xx_top(config-ext-nacl)#do sh ver | incl IOS
> >IOS (tm) RSP Software (RSP-PV-M), Version 12.3(17), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc2)
> >75xx_top(config-ext-nacl)#
> >
> >+ class-based shaping
> >  
> >
> >
> >What exact configuration do you mean by class-based shaping?
> >
> > 
> >  
> >
> >>12.2.25S8
> >>
> >>eugene vedistchev
> >>
> >>--- Original Message ---
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Are you saying you have it replicated in the lab?
> >>>
> >>>The OSPF bad checksum just means that OSPF detects
> >>>the packet doesn't have the correct checksum value
> >>>when it runs it over the LSA's in the update.
> >>>
> >>>btw, can you guys list out the feature combinations
> >>>that are requiring you to run 12.2S on the 75xx's?
> >>>
> >>>On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 02:06:45PM -0500, Greg Boehnlein wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, David Coulson wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>>>12.2(18)S11 on 7507 w/ RSP4.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>We've been seeing this frequently (IP address of source varies)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Mar 19 07:31:09 core1.clevoh.n2net.net 515: Mar 19 07:31:01:
> >>>>>%OSPF-4-ERRRCV: Received invalid packet: Bad Checksum from
> >>>>>207.166.192.208, GigabitEthernet4/0/0.100
> >>>>>
> >>>>>If I do a 'memory cache-policy io uncached', it solves the problem,
> >>>>>however it kills the CPU on the router.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Is this potentially a hardware issue, or an IOS bug? We've moved the
> >>>>>interface to a seperate GEIP (different GEIP, GBIC, fiber, GBIC, switch)
> >>>>>and we get the same problem. We never encountered this on PA-FE or FEIPs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Does anyone have any suggestions for troubleshooting this, before I just
> >>>>>go and load 12.2 on to it?
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>>As a side note, this has been tested and replicated on a pair of 7507s 
> >>>>running Dual RSP-4s w/ the same IOS version. That's two completely 
> >>>>independent routers w/ completely different hardware...
> >>>>
> >>>>-- 
> >>>>   Vice President of N2Net, a New Age Consulting Service, Inc. Company
> >>>>        http://www.n2net.net Where everything clicks into place!
> >>>>                            KP-216-121-ST
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>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/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list