[c-nsp] Sup720 CoPP, limits on CPU performance

[Ross Vandegrift]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:18:32PM +0000, Phil Mayers wrote:
> Interesting. We saw the opposite; transit traffic being punted (for  
> glean) and dropped by CoPP, so the ARP resolution would never succeed.
>
> What sup/PFC versions? Were you using "class-default" or a "match all" ACL.
>
> I wish this stuff were more consistent...

I'll be honest I don't remember - that version of the policy got
chopped up into a different policy later when I realized that it
wasn't so simple for me to accomplish what I wanted.  I'll see if I
can dig out a copy.

Ross

-- 
Ross Vandegrift
ross at kallisti.us

"If the fight gets hot, the songs get hotter.  If the going gets tough,
the songs get tougher."
	--Woody Guthrie
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20100324/c050aa01/attachment.bin>