[c-nsp] CPU comparison - bridge vs. route on 7206?

[Rodney Dunn]

The PA-GE has issues at higher speeds.

You should move to L2TPV3 and see if it's better in regards
to performance. Your best would be pure L3 forwarding.

If the PA-GE is the issue you will have to get off that PA.

What happens if you move it to one of the onboard GigE ports on the NPE-400?

Rodney

On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 12:56:39PM -0400, Chris Hale wrote:
> We have a set of 7206VXR's, NPE400 CPUs on each end of a point to point OC3
> using PA-POS-OC3 cards.  We bridge these circuits through a PA-GE interface
> (essentially turning the 7206's into a OC-3 to GigE converter) with a single
> bridge group.
> 
> We are trying to push nearly 130-140Mbps, but per the MRTG graphs, we seem
> to be capping @ ~110Mbps.  The CPU is also averaging 80-90%.  We're seeing a
> large number of input errors (ignored, total of 5% of input packets) and a
> fair amount of output pauses (0.12% of output packets).
> 
> GigabitEthernet1/0 is up, line protocol is up
>   Hardware is WISEMAN, address is 0016.46e6.1c1c (bia 0016.46e6.1c1c)
>   MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1000000 Kbit, DLY 10 usec,
>      reliability 255/255, txload 36/255, rxload 16/255
>   Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set
>   Keepalive set (10 sec)
>   Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s, link type is autonegotiation, media type is unknown
> media type
>   output flow-control is XON, input flow-control is XON
>   ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00
>   Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never
>   Last clearing of "show interface" counters 12w0d
>   Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 208
>   Queueing strategy: fifo
>   Output queue: 0/40 (size/max)
>   30 second input rate 66046000 bits/sec, 29231 packets/sec
>   30 second output rate 141617000 bits/sec, 31690 packets/sec
>      2816822087 packets input, 1367339773 bytes, 0 no buffer
>      Received 7138653 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
>      143326584 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 481945 overrun, 142844639
> ignored
>      0 watchdog, 4536607 multicast, 0 pause input
>      0 input packets with dribble condition detected
>      3993978307 packets output, 979813878 bytes, 0 underruns
>      0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets
>      0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred
>      4 lost carrier, 0 no carrier, 4808187 pause output
>      0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out
> 
> If we move this to a routed infrastructure with CEF, can we expect the CPU
> to drop considerably?   The routing will be static only, very simple config
> with no ACLs, no policy maps, etc.  We're just trying to get the routers to
> let us push as much of the OC3 bandwidth as possible.
> 
> We would rather not upgrade the NPE400's if possible.  The internal LAN
> equipment is Nortel L3 switches which don't seem to support flow-control.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any ideas.
> 
> Chris
> 
> -- 
> ------------------
> Chris Hale
> chale99 at gmail.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/