[c-nsp] output rate-limiting not working in 7609

Edwin Lok edwinlok at gmail.com
Thu Mar 6 10:14:28 EST 2008


Hi Tim,

How about the egress policing on a 7600-SIP-400 and SPA-2X1GE-V2 combo?

Is egress policing done at the egress or still on the FE ingress interfaces?

Thanks

Rgds
Edwin

On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 1:24 AM, Tim Stevenson <tstevens at cisco.com> wrote:
> The problem exists as long as there are multiple
>  active forwarding engines in the box, even if you use the uplinks on the sup.
>
>  Tim
>
>  (BTW, the uplinks on the RSP are active on both sups).
>
>  At 06:51 AM 3/5/2008 -0600, Frank Bulk - iNAME observed:
>
>
> >Perhaps this is a naïve question, as I'm in the same boat as Jimmy, but
>  >should I put my 2 backbones on my RSP720s instead, one backbone on each of
>  >them, to avoid the problem?  Will the GigE ports on each of the RSP720s be
>  >in a working state, or only the active sup?
>  >
>  >Frank
>  >
>  >-----Original Message-----
>  >From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
>  >[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jimmy
>  >Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 12:35 AM
>  >To: tstevens at cisco.com; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>  >Subject: Re: [c-nsp] output rate-limiting not working in 7609
>  >
>  >Hi Tim,
>  >
>  >Thanks for your input.
>  >Actually we have 2 backbones connected to this 7600.
>  >One is in slot 1 and the other one is in slot 2.
>  >This explain the n times of the configured rate that I am getting on that
>  >egress interface rite now (2x155M)
>  >
>  >Is there any better workaround? It is not good idea to put both backbones on
>  >the same slot. It supposes to be for redundancy.
>  >
>  >Cheers,
>  >Jimmy
>  >
>  >-----Original Message-----
>  >From: Tim Stevenson [mailto:tstevens at cisco.com]
>  >Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 12:30 PM
>  >To: Jimmy; petelists at templin.org; mtinka at globaltransit.net;
>  >christian at qunec.net; gniewomir.krol at aci.com.pl; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>  >Subject: Re: [c-nsp] output rate-limiting not working in 7609
>  >
>  >At 08:15 PM 3/3/2008 -0800, Tim Stevenson observed:
>  > >Jimmy,
>  > >In 6500/7600, policing and other forwarding decisions are always
>  > >performed on the INGRESS card - including egress policy enforcement.
>  >
>  >Above I meant to say "the INGRESS FORWARDING ENGINE" - which may be just
>  >one, ie the PFC on the sup (regardless of which card the traffic came in
>  >on), or could be one of many, ie, one of several DFCs that sit on some/all
>  >cards. The rest of the below applies in that case.
>  >Obviously with just one FE, there is only one point of policy action.
>  >
>  >Tim
>  >
>  >
>  > >Therefore, in a distributed (ie, w/DFCs) system, you potentially could
>  > >get n times the configured rate, where n is the number of forwarding
>  > >engines that traffic destined for the egress interface could
>  > >potentially come in on.
>  > >
>  > >Of course, the problem with your workaround is that no one module will
>  > >ever allow more than 155M even if no traffic is coming in on the other
>  > >module.
>  > >
>  > >Tim
>  > >
>  > >At 11:51 AM 3/4/2008 +0800, Jimmy observed:
>  > >>Hi guys,
>  > >>
>  > >>Thanks for the feedback. Actually I have tried using MQC on the egress
>  >side.
>  > >>It is Layer 3 port.
>  > >>The port is in slot 1. For some reason when I do "show policy-map
>  > >>interface", it is showing an output from 2 slots instead of 1. I am
>  > >>using a dirty trick to temporarily solve the issue. I did policing to
>  > >>155M instead of 310M. With this setting, the traffic can only reach 310M.
>  > >>
>  > >>Any idea why we need to configure like that? Or anyone has encountered
>  > >>the same issue?
>  > >>
>  > >>Cheers,
>  > >>Jimmy
>  > >>
>  > >>-------------------------------
>  > >>interface GigabitEthernet1/9
>  > >>  ip route-cache flow
>  > >>  load-interval 30
>  > >>  speed nonegotiate
>  > >>  mls netflow sampling
>  > >>  service-policy input CUSTOMER-310m
>  > >>  service-policy output CUSTOMER-155M
>  > >>
>  > >>policy-map CUSTOMER-155M
>  > >>   class class-default
>  > >>    police cir 155000000 bc 15500000 be 15500000 conform-action
>  > >>transmit exceed-action drop ----> POLICE to 155M
>  > >>
>  > >>gw1.hkg4#sh policy int g1/9
>  > >>  GigabitEthernet1/9
>  > >>
>  > >>   Service-policy output: CUSTOMER-155M
>  > >>
>  > >>     class-map: class-default (match-any)
>  > >>       Match: any
>  > >>       police :
>  > >>         155000000 bps 15500000 limit 15500000 extended limit
>  > >>       Earl in slot 1 :
>  > >>         16889514278576 bytes
>  > >>         30 second offered rate 196550600 bps
>  > >>         aggregate-forwarded 13191791357655 bytes action: transmit
>  > >>         exceeded 3697722920921 bytes action: drop
>  > >>         aggregate-forward 157101144 bps exceed 40026752 bps
>  > >>       Earl in slot 2 : ----------------------------> ANOTHER POLICING ???
>  > >>         14639062953589 bytes
>  > >>         30 second offered rate 174721136 bps
>  > >>         aggregate-forwarded 13135487245073 bytes action: transmit
>  > >>         exceeded 1503575708516 bytes action: drop
>  > >>         aggregate-forward 159830912 bps exceed 18063232 bps
>  > >>       Earl in slot 5 :
>  > >>         30560015 bytes
>  > >>         30 second offered rate 176 bps
>  > >>         aggregate-forwarded 30560015 bytes action: transmit
>  > >>         exceeded 0 bytes action: drop
>  > >>         aggregate-forward 240 bps exceed 0 bps
>  > >>
>  > >>gw1.hkg4#sh mls qos ip g 1/9
>  > >>    [In] Policy map is CUSTOMER-310m   [Out] Policy map is CUSTOMER-155M
>  > >>  QoS Summary [IPv4]:      (* - shared aggregates, Mod - switch module)
>  > >>
>  > >>       Int Mod Dir  Class-map DSCP  Agg  Trust Fl   AgForward-By
>  > >>AgPoliced-By
>  > >>                                    Id         Id
>  > >>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > >>------
>  > >>---
>  > >>      Gi1/9  1  In class-defa    0    1   dscp  0   486690994913
>  > >>54268431391
>  > >>      Gi1/9  1 Out class-defa    0    2     --  0   548444567177
>  > >>399451084094
>  > >>      Gi1/9  2 Out class-defa    0    1     --  0   492136489401
>  > >>404181645273 ----> SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY OUTPUT
>  > >>      Gi1/9  5 Out class-defa    0    1     --  0       30561099
>  > >>0
>  > >>-----------------------------------------------
>  > >>
>  > >>-----Original Message-----
>  > >>From: Pete Templin [mailto:petelists at templin.org]
>  > >>Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 12:26 AM
>  > >>To: Jimmy
>  > >>Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>  > >>Subject: Re: [c-nsp] output rate-limiting not working in 7609
>  > >>
>  > >>Jimmy wrote:
>  > >>
>  > >> > I have encountered rate-limiting issue on CISCO7609 platform.
>  > >> >
>  > >> > Example is:
>  > >> >
>  > >> > interface GigabitEthernet1/9
>  > >> >  rate-limit input 310000000 4843750 9687500 conform-action transmit
>  > >> > exceed-action drop  rate-limit output 310000000 4843750 9687500
>  > >> > conform-action transmit exceed-action drop  -------> NOT WORKING
>  > >> >
>  > >> > The output rate-limiting is not working. The traffic still can go
>  > >> > above 310M and can hit 1G.
>  > >> > I have created SR with cisco. They are saying there is no work
>  > >> > around for this except that we use ES20 to use policy-map on the
>  >interface.
>  > >>
>  > >>Your example is too short - is it a layer 3 port?  If so, a policer
>  > >>inside a policy-map should work.  If not, it won't work.  From the Sup720
>  >datasheet:
>  > >>rate limiting is possible on "Ingress port or VLAN and egress VLAN or
>  > >>Layer-3 port".
>  > >>
>  > >>pt
>  > >>
>  > >>_______________________________________________
>  > >>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/
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >Tim Stevenson, tstevens at cisco.com
>  > >Routing & Switching CCIE #5561
>  > >Technical Marketing Engineer, Data Center BU Cisco Systems,
>  > >http://www.cisco.com IP Phone: 408-526-6759
>  > >********************************************************
>  > >The contents of this message may be *Cisco Confidential* and are
>  > >intended for the specified recipients only.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >Tim Stevenson, tstevens at cisco.com
>  >Routing & Switching CCIE #5561
>  >Technical Marketing Engineer, Data Center BU Cisco Systems,
>  >http://www.cisco.com IP Phone: 408-526-6759
>  >********************************************************
>  >The contents of this message may be *Cisco Confidential* and are intended
>  >for the specified recipients only.
>  >
>  >_______________________________________________
>  >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/
>
>
>
>  Tim Stevenson, tstevens at cisco.com
>  Routing & Switching CCIE #5561
>  Technical Marketing Engineer, Data Center BU
>  Cisco Systems, http://www.cisco.com
>  IP Phone: 408-526-6759
>  ********************************************************
>  The contents of this message may be *Cisco Confidential*
>  and are intended for the specified recipients only.
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  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