[c-nsp] Spanning-Tree vs. EoMPLS links in SXI2?

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 07:44:27PM +0000, Mateusz Blaszczyk wrote:
> maybe you are hitting some old bug as I did long time ago on SXH1, it
> was 3C bug...
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/nsp/81589 ?

Thanks for the pointer.  This is very similar to what we experience - except
that we're using SXI2 on 6500/Sup720-10G-3CXL.

On SXH3a, we have *no* problems.  So either this is a new bug, or the
hardware differences between 6524ME and Sup720 have lead to it showing
up in SXI2 on the Sup720.  Or it wasn't properly fixed.

The bug tool states for your bug ID (CSCsm70349)...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cat6k with PFC version 3C, when BPDU traffice sent over EOMPLS there is a
chance that packets did not get switched or these packets come sent to SP again
from RP.

Conditions:

SP cpu utilization may be high.
This is specific to sup720.

Workaround:
Not to Send BPDU over EOMPLS.

This bug specific to EOMPLS BPDU traffic with PFC version 3cXL. This can
be seen with ION and IOS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

... the description certainly matches.

The annoying bit is that the bug tool claims it's fixed in SXI and SHX2,
so we should not see this with SXI2.

*grumble*.

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 305 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20100310/79658133/attachment.bin>