[j-nsp] MX104 limitation

Thu Mar 23 13:37:39 EDT 2017

Hi,

If you run with inline jflow what was your sampling rate ?
IIRC there is some bw limitation for inline sampling but I dont know if it
include the sampling calculation or not

Nitzan

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi> wrote:

> It's still about 75Gbps (i.e. for example 35Gbps+40Gbps) and 55Mpps.
>
> But memory bandwidth is dependant on how well packet aligns into
> cells, in manufactured example you could have packet which cause
> singly byte to be transferred on second cell, essentially doubling
> internal memory bandwidth requirement.
> Traffic hitting QX will also experience significantly lower memory
> bandwidth.
>
> This is not MX104 specific, same applies to MX80, and MPC1, MPC2, MPC3
> on per Trio basis.
>
> On 23 March 2017 at 03:31, Javier Rodriguez <rodriguezsotelo at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > As Nitzan suggested, I deactivated the inline jflow and the traffic has
> > increased.
> > Now I ask, what is the real forwarding capacity of this box? 40G in + 40G
> > out? (now it didn't reach 40G in total)
> >
> > Javier.
> >
> > 2017-03-20 12:15 GMT-03:00 Javier Rodriguez <rodriguezsotelo at gmail.com>:
> >
> >> Nitzan, thank you very much, I'll keep that in mind.
> >> Anyway I can not understand how the router "eats" the packets without
> >> being counted ....That gives me panic!
> >> I can't find discarded packets anywhere!
> >>
> >> JR.
> >>
> >> 2017-03-20 2:31 GMT-03:00 Nitzan Tzelniker <nitzan.tzelniker at gmail.com
> >:
> >>
> >>> We saw a limitation around 40Gbps when running MX80 with RE based jflow
> >>> (inline works good ) we didnt got good explanation why it limit the
> traffic
> >>> so try to disable some features and see if it help
> >>>
> >>> Nitzan
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Javier Rodriguez <
> >>> rodriguezsotelo at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Mmm no, I think it doesn't  work on MX80 / MX104.
> >>>>
> >>>> JR.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 2017-03-19 23:14 GMT-03:00 Olivier Benghozi <
> olivier.benghozi at wifirst.fr
> >>>> >:
> >>>>
> >>>> > What about bypass-queuing-chip on MIC interfaces ? Would it work on
> >>>> > MX80/104 ?
> >>>> >
> >>>> > > On 20 march 2017 at 01:32, Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi> wrote :
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > Ok that's only 31Gbps total, without having any actual data, my
> best
> >>>> > > guess is that you're running through QX. Only quick reason I can
> come
> >>>> > > up for HW to limit on so modest traffic levels.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > On 20 March 2017 at 02:25, Javier Rodriguez <
> >>>> rodriguezsotelo at gmail.com>
> >>>> > wrote:
> >>>> > >> Soku,
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> Maybe there was a misunderstanding , the inbound traffic on
> fpc2's
> >>>> LAG
> >>>> > was
> >>>> > >> 4Gbps , and the outbound traffic was 27Gbps aprox. That outbound
> >>>> traffic
> >>>> > >> enters by the fpc1 and fpc0.
> >>>> > >> It's IMIX traffic, the average packet size is 1250Bytes (out)
> >>>> 200Bytes
> >>>> > (in).
> >>>> > >> I tried to see dropped packets with "show precl-eng 5 statistics
> "
> >>>> and
> >>>> > "show
> >>>> > >> mqchip 0 drop stats" at pfe shell but it's 0. Does it save
> >>>> historical
> >>>> > data?
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> <--27G-- | | <--27G--
> >>>> > >> |FPC2 FPC 0/1 |
> >>>> > >> --4G--> |     | --4G-->
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> Regards,
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> Javier.
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> 2017-03-19 20:43 GMT-03:00 Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi>:
> >>>> > >>>
> >>>> > >>> Hey,
> >>>> > >>>
> >>>> > >>> There aren't multiple FPCs on the box really, there is only
> single
> >>>> MQ
> >>>> > >>> chip out of where all ports sit, usually MIC ports behind
> >>>> additional
> >>>> > >>> IX chip, which is not congested. It's architecturally single
> >>>> linecard
> >>>> > >>> fabricless box.
> >>>> > >>> You're saying you're pushing on the 4x10GE fixed ports
> 31+31Gbps,
> >>>> e.g.
> >>>> > >>> 62Gbps? It might be possible on (perhaps artificially)
> unfortunate
> >>>> > >>> cell alignment that it could be congested on so low values. Are
> all
> >>>> > >>> the packets same size, i.e is this lab scenario or just IMIX
> >>>> traffic?
> >>>> > >>> MQ pfe exceptions and MQ=>LU counters might be interesting to
> see.
> >>>> > >>>
> >>>> > >>> If you use QX chip, 62Gbps would be really good, QX chip is not
> >>>> > >>> dimensioned for line rate _unidir_ (i.e. can't do even 40Gbps).
> If
> >>>> you
> >>>> > >>> don't know if you're using QX or not, just deactive whole
> >>>> > >>> class-of-service and scheduer config in interfaces.
> >>>> > >>>
> >>>> > >>> On 20 March 2017 at 01:26, Javier Rodriguez <
> >>>> rodriguezsotelo at gmail.com
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >>> wrote:
> >>>> > >>>> Hi,
> >>>> > >>>>
> >>>> > >>>> Thanks for your reply Saku.
> >>>> > >>>> The problem is that fpc2 (fixed ports) can't overcome 31Gbps
> (in +
> >>>> > out)
> >>>> > >>>> with 6Mpps. The graph shows a straight line as if it were being
> >>>> > limited.
> >>>> > >>>> I have moved some interfaces from LAG to fpc1 and fpc0 and the
> >>>> traffic
> >>>> > >>>> has
> >>>> > >>>> incresed. (It only has a tunnel-service in fpc0 of 1g)
> >>>> > >>>> It's as if it were being limited by the MQ, but I do not see
> >>>> discarded
> >>>> > >>>> packages, or I do not know where to look at them.
> >>>> > >>>>
> >>>> > >>>> JR.
> >>>> > >>>>
> >>>> > >>>> 2017-03-19 6:53 GMT-03:00 Saku Ytti <ytti at ntt.net>:
> >>>> > >>>>
> >>>> > >>>>> Hey Javier,
> >>>> > >>>>>
> >>>> > >>>>>
> >>>> > >>>>> MX104 and MX80 (1st gen Trio MQ/LU) should do about 55Mpps and
> >>>> 75Gbps
> >>>> > >>>>> (in+out).
> >>>> > >>>>>
> >>>> > >>>>> On 19 March 2017 at 09:12, Javier Rodriguez <
> >>>> > rodriguezsotelo at gmail.com>
> >>>> > >>>>> wrote:
> >>>> > >>>>>> Hi everyone,
> >>>> > >>>>>>
> >>>> > >>>>>> I need a bit of your knowledge.
> >>>> > >>>>>> I have a MX104 as PE router with 4 LAGs.
> >>>> > >>>>>> One LAG facing to P router on FPC2 (fixed ports). The other
> LAGs
> >>>> > >>>>>> distributed in FPC0 and FPC1.
> >>>> > >>>>>> The problem is that traffic is being limited when reach 28G
> >>>> out/ 4G
> >>>> > >>>>>> in
> >>>> > >>>>>> (31Gbps total).
> >>>> > >>>>>> I changed one interface (10G) of the LAG (to P router) to
> FPC1
> >>>> and
> >>>> > >>>>>> the
> >>>> > >>>>>> traffic has grown a little more.
> >>>> > >>>>>>
> >>>> > >>>>>> Where is the limitation? In the MQ chip?
> >>>> > >>>>>> Where can I see those discarded packages?
> >>>> > >>>>>> How much traffic will the router support on FPC2?
> >>>> > >>>>>> Where could I get a graphic of its internal architecture?
> >>>> > >>>>>> Does a MX80 have the same behavior?
> >>>> >
> >>>> > _______________________________________________
> >>>> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >>>> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Atte.
> >>>>
> >>>> Javier I. Rodríguez Sotelo
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Atte.
> >>
> >> Javier I. Rodríguez Sotelo
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Atte.
> >
> > Javier I. Rodríguez Sotelo
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
>
>
> --
>   ++ytti
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>