[c-nsp] 7206 L2TP and Gigawords

Paul Stewart paul at paulstewart.org
Thu Jan 20 05:52:03 EST 2011


Well, we just turned it on around beginning of December... I'm told by our folks that handle Radius internally that they are not getting negative counters anymore (from counter wrap) and are seeing accounting updates every hour.

The weird thing that I do recall was that Gigawords was supposed to be on by default according to some docs - but didn't see it in the configuration and wanted to verify.  When we added the command for gigawords into our configuration, we got output back that said it would take effect upon reboot.  I do recall that up to that point we were *not* seeing 32 bit information in Radius at all making me wonder how it is supposed to be working by default - so in the next maint window we kicked the 7206VXR and now it's working.

Honestly, haven't spent a lot of time on it.. we're migrating off the 7206VXR into Juniper E series currently....

Let me know if I can be of any other assistance ;)

Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: Gerald Krause [mailto:gk at ax.tc] 
Sent: January-19-11 10:35 PM
To: Paul Stewart
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7206 L2TP and Gigawords

Hi Paul,

that's interesting! :)

I'am a little bit confused if any 12.2 version will support this feature
at all, because I just found this:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2/security/configuration/guide/scfradat.html#wp1016587

Does your LNS sending these attributes by default in every STOP or
INTERIM Acct packet? Have you done any special configuration?

--
Gerald

Am 20.01.2011 04:12, schrieb Paul Stewart:
> Yes, we're running it without any "known issues" on 12.2(33)SRD1 if that
> helps...;)
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Gerald Krause
> Sent: January-19-11 9:51 PM
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7206 L2TP and Gigawords
> 
> I stumbled upon this bug in SRD3 too an tried SRE2 but without success.
> Does anyone get the Gigawords working with an NPE-G2 acting as LNS?
> 
> --
> Gerald
> 
> Am 06.06.2010 11:14, schrieb Phil Pierotti:
>> Hi Arie,
>>
>> Also:
>>
>> Checking the Bug Toolkit for that number you mentioned, it says that both
>> SRD3 and SRD4 are impacted by this bug. But nothing in SR train is listed
> in
>> the 'fixed-in' for this bug.
>>
>> So the obvious question is, given that I need to upgrade - what's the
>> recommended IOS for a 7206VXR with NPE-G1 acting as LAC/LNS, some MPLS and
>> BGP, a little NAT and some IPSEC.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> PhiL P
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Phil Pierotti
> <phil.pierotti at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> HI Arie,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your help - details inline.
>>>
>>> Since I brought this session up this morning, I have downloaded 6.18GB of
>>> LINUX ISOs for testing purposes, and then 'normal internet' use since
> then
>>> as well, all in this same session.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Arie Vayner (avayner)
> <avayner at cisco.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Phil,
>>>>
>>>> I have worked on this kind of an issue and we have CSCsw74470 for this
>>>> one, which is integrated in SRD3 (I made sure, and it is there).
>>>> The code to generate RADIUS gigawords is there, so this has to be
>>>> something else...
>>>>
>>>> We need to identify if the problem is due to the info not being
>>>> collected (i.e. the counters for the interface are 32-bit) or we just do
>>>> not report it in RADIUS (so the info is there, and it's "just" not
>>>> reported).
>>>>
>>>> Use these commands:
>>>> sh int virtual-access #
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Virtual-Access2.135 is up, line protocol is up
>>>   Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>>   Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback10 (??.??.??.??)
>>>   MTU 1500 bytes, BW 149760 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
>>>      reliability 255/255, txload 45/255, rxload 7/255
>>>   Encapsulation PPP, LCP Open
>>>   Open: IPCP
>>>   PPPoVPDN vaccess, cloned from Virtual-Template6
>>>   Vaccess status 0x0
>>>   Protocol l2tp, tunnel id 55022, session id 6814
>>>   Keepalive set (10 sec)
>>>      2889718 packets input, 341932313 bytes
>>>      4778457 packets output, 2503224921 bytes
>>>   Last clearing of "show interface" counters never
>>>
>>>
>>> Bytes Output reported is 2,503,224,921 or 2.5GB
>>>
>>> Clearly the problem is a counter wrap/not-being-collected problem.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Look at the counter for a session that should be >4294967296 bytes
>>>> in/out (2^32) - Does it overlap to 0, or keep counting beyond 2^32?
>>>>
>>>> Then, if the counters are >2^32 (which means we count fine, and just
>>>> have a reporting issue), use:
>>>>
>>>> sh subscriber session username <username> detailed
>>>>
>>>> Look for the "AAA_id", which is a HEX number, and then use it with:
>>>> sh aaa user <AAA_id> (in a 0xNNNN format).
>>>>
>>>> The pre-bytes-in/out field are used by Gigawords. If the counter should
>>>> be more than 2^32, then pre-bytes-in/out should be >0.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Interface:
>>>   TTY Num = -1
>>>   Stop Received = 0
>>>   Byte/Packet Counts till Call Start:
>>>     Start Bytes In = 0             Start Bytes Out = 0
>>>     Start Paks  In = 0             Start Paks  Out = 0
>>>   Byte/Packet Counts till Service Up:
>>>     Pre Bytes In = 0             Pre Bytes Out = 0
>>>     Pre Paks  In = 0             Pre Paks  Out = 0
>>>   Cumulative Byte/Packet Counts :
>>>     Bytes In = 342239526     Bytes Out = 2503793377
>>>     Paks  In = 2891654       Paks  Out = 4780378
>>>   StartTime = 09:59:17 AEST Jun 6 2010
>>>   AuthenTime = 09:59:17 AEST Jun 6 2010
>>>   Component = VPDN
>>>
>>> Pre-Bytes are zeros, but they should not be, so this confirms a
>>> failure-to-collect problem.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If all is still fine, look at debug radius...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would suggest to file a TAC case with the following findings, and
>>>> maybe reference the above DDTS.... It could be something new...
>>>>
>>>> Arie
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
>>>> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Phil Pierotti
>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2010 05:56
>>>> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>>> Subject: [c-nsp] 7206 L2TP and Gigawords
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> I'm running a 7206/G1 with AdvIP Services 12.2(33)SRD3 as an LNS.
>>>>
>>>> Sending periodic accounting updates every ten minutes.
>>>>
>>>> Running a download test to verify the LNS is sending RADIUS Gigawords
>>>> attributes (52 and 53), backending against Freeradius.
>>>>
>>>> Looking at the freeradius detail log, it's obvious that my LNS is *not*
>>>> generating Gigawords attributes.
>>>>
>>>> >From two successive interim updates, I clearly see byte-counter
>>>> rollover and
>>>> no packet-counter rollover (same user, same session):
>>>>
>>>>        Acct-Output-Octets = 3883719317
>>>>        Acct-Output-Packets = 2592080
>>>>
>>>>        Acct-Output-Octets = 257083854
>>>>        Acct-Output-Packets = 3036810
>>>>
>>>> And there's no gigawords attribute (Acct-Output-Gigawords, etc) being
>>>> generated.
>>>>
>>>> According to Cisco: gigawords attributes are enabled by default (ie only
>>>> the
>>>> NO form of the command will show in the config).
>>>> I've checked my config, I'm not NO'ing that (why would you?)
>>>>
>>>> So can anyone suggest why my LNS is not generating these attributes when
>>>> they're needed?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Phil P
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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