[c-nsp] Lot of input errors on a NPE-G1 interface

Wed May 23 19:10:57 EDT 2012

Similar traffic on the other port I assume, outbound port for the router?
No input errors there?

If you also see input errors and overruns on the other port, the CPU is
probably having issues emptying the buffer before it runs out of buffer
space which would suggest high CPU usage during the times when the
overruns are occuring.  Then you should look at why that is the case, it's
not enough traffic to really cause that issue, but you might have other
features enabled that are causing the box to use a lot of cpu.

If there are no errors on the other port, it's more likely that this is a
layer 1 problem, and you should try replacing the optics if you have
spares or cleaning the existing ones

Kind regards,
Sibbi

On 23.5.2012 21:24, "gal.9430 at googlemail.com" <gal.9430 at googlemail.com>
wrote:

>> Are you getting bursts of traffic that might not register on traffic
>>graphs polling at 5 minute intervals?
>
>No, I don't think so. Burst traffic never exceeds 80-100 Mbps. We're
>polling in a 1 min interval.
>
>
>On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Edward Salonia
><Edward.Salonia at ipsoft.com> wrote:
>> Drops and overruns... Sounds like you are overloading your port buffer.
>>Are you getting bursts of traffic that might not register on traffic
>>graphs polling at 5 minute intervals?
>>
>> - Ed
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
>>[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
>>gal.9430 at googlemail.com
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 5:00 PM
>> To: Sigurbjörn Birkir Lárusson
>> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Lot of input errors on a NPE-G1 interface
>>
>>> Is this the only traffic going through this 7200?
>>
>> No. Gi0/1 is connected via 2960G to another router (iBGP). Gi0/2 is
>> connected to an eBGP peer
>> who sends a full table.
>>
>>> How is your scheduler allocate set on the 7200...
>>
>> Default value, not changed.
>>
>>> ...have you tried a new cable and cleaning the optics?
>>
>> New cable: yes
>> Cleaning the optics: no
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Sigurbjörn Birkir Lárusson
>> <sigurbjornl at vodafone.is> wrote:
>>> Is this the only traffic going through this 7200?
>>>
>>> How is your scheduler allocate set on the 7200, have you tried a new
>>>cable
>>> and cleaning the optics?
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Sibbi
>>>
>>> On 23.5.2012 19:33, "gal.9430 at googlemail.com" <gal.9430 at googlemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>thanks all for the input.
>>>>
>>>>Increasing the hold-queue (from default to 100) doesn't seem to help at
>>>>all:
>>>>
>>>>GigabitEthernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up
>>>>  Hardware is BCM1250 Internal MAC, address is 0006.52f4.d81b (bia
>>>>0006.52f4.d81b)
>>>>  Internet address is x.x.x.x/28
>>>>  MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1000000 Kbit/sec, DLY 10 usec,
>>>>     reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 2/255
>>>>  Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set
>>>>  Keepalive set (10 sec)
>>>>  Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s, link type is autonegotiation, media type is SX
>>>>  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 02:17:11
>>>>  Input queue: 0/100/742/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output
>>>>drops: 0
>>>>  Queueing strategy: fifo
>>>>  Output queue: 0/40 (size/max)
>>>>  5 minute input rate 10536000 bits/sec, 1824 packets/sec
>>>>  5 minute output rate 6813000 bits/sec, 2121 packets/sec
>>>>     11770910 packets input, 2922271410 bytes, 0 no buffer
>>>>     Received 215 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
>>>>     341 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 341 overrun, 0 ignored
>>>>     0 watchdog, 4242 multicast, 0 pause input
>>>>     0 input packets with dribble condition detected
>>>>     14975201 packets output, 1820911878 bytes, 0 underruns
>>>>     0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets
>>>>     137 unknown protocol drops
>>>>     0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred
>>>>     0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier, 0 pause output
>>>>     0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out
>>>>
>>>>Will go from 100 to 150 and see whats happen.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Phil Mayers <p.mayers at imperial.ac.uk>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>> On 05/23/2012 08:18 PM, Chris Gotstein wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> %Warning: portfast should only be enabled on ports connected to a
>>>>>>single
>>>>>> host. Connecting hubs, concentrators, switches, bridges, etcŠ to
>>>>>>this
>>>>>> interface when portfast is enabled, can cause temporary bridging
>>>>>>loops.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My understanding of this was a router would be included as well
>>>>>>since
>>>>>> it's used to connect multiple hosts.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If you don't enable portfast, you have to suffer the STP state
>>>>>transitions,
>>>>> which lead to delays in traffic forwarding after link-up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Portfast basically means: "This port is unlikely to be connected to
>>>>>another
>>>>> bridge or hub, so skip the LISTENING/LEARNING transitions and jump
>>>>>straight
>>>>> to forwarding; if it goes wrong, STP will close the loop shortly."
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not magic; and it should be enabled on all host ports. Routers
>>>>>are
>>>>> hosts, at layer2.
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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/