It does block these packets, but this does not effect the CPU, they are still punted, nothing can be done about this.

There is no rate-limiter either on this platform, on the 6k we have:

- mls rate-limit all ttl-failure <value per milisec>

Best case is going to be stop the sources sending, not many other options.

Rich

On 24 Apr 2009, at 16:06, Lee wrote:

Too bad the multicast ttl-thresold doesn't work.  Does your
access-list 178 block traffic to 224.0.0.252?

Lee


On 4/24/09, Chris Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
nterface Vlan217
description CUSTOMER A
ip address x.x.x.x.x
ip access-group 178 in
no ip redirects
no ip unreachables
no ip proxy-arp
ip multicast ttl-threshold 3

shcpu
CPU utilization for five seconds: 92%/51%; one minute: 92%; five minutes:
92%
PID Runtime(ms)   Invoked      uSecs   5Sec   1Min   5Min TTY Process
9 14412 39169 367 0.95% 0.19% 0.08% 0 ARP Input

51 155152 901076 172 2.55% 0.92% 0.93% 0 Fifo Error
Detec
67 12541 522329 24 0.15% 0.07% 0.05% 0 HLFM address
ret
115 622003 413812 1503 7.34% 7.52% 7.49% 0 Hulc LED
Process
136      166229     17815       9330  0.63%  0.60%  0.60%   0 PI MATM
Aging
Pr
168 5892258 12519191 470 25.23% 23.54% 24.45% 0 IP Input

171 32572 45322 718 0.15% 0.13% 0.12% 0 Spanning
Tree

thanks for input
2009/4/24 Lee <[email protected]>

These TTL=1 are causing the high CPU.

Just out of curiousity, would adding "ip multicast ttl-threshold 3"
and/or "no ip unreachable" on the interface reduce cpu usage?

Lee


On 4/24/09, Richard Gallagher <[email protected]> wrote:
Input queue was full of packets like this:

Buffer information for RxQ3 buffer at 0x2E792F0
  data_area 0x7BB2AB0, refcount 1, next 0x2E7E210, flags 0x200
  linktype 7 (IP), enctype 1 (ARPA), encsize 14, rxtype 1
  if_input 0x3ABBAE0 (Vlan217), if_output 0x0 (None)
  inputtime 00:00:00.000 (elapsed never)
  outputtime 00:00:00.000 (elapsed never), oqnumber 65535
  datagramstart 0x7BB2AF6, datagramsize 82, maximum size 2196
  mac_start 0x7BB2AF6, addr_start 0x7BB2AF6, info_start 0x0
  network_start 0x7BB2B04, transport_start 0x7BB2B18, caller_pc
0x6D1024

source: 74.212.165.187, destination: 224.0.0.252, id: 0x3CDA, ttl:
1,
  TOS: 0 prot: 17, source port 58064, destination port 5355

Buffer information for RxQFB buffer at 0x2672BB0
  data_area 0x758C35C, refcount 1, next 0x263960C, flags 0x200
  linktype 7 (IP), enctype 1 (ARPA), encsize 14, rxtype 1
  if_input 0x3ABBAE0 (Vlan217), if_output 0x0 (None)
  inputtime 00:00:00.000 (elapsed never)
  outputtime 00:00:00.000 (elapsed never), oqnumber 65535
  datagramstart 0x758C3A2, datagramsize 64, maximum size 2196
  mac_start 0x758C3A2, addr_start 0x758C3A2, info_start 0x0
  network_start 0x758C3B0, transport_start 0x0, caller_pc 0x6D1024

source: 74.212.165.187, destination: 224.0.0.252, id: 0x3CDA, ttl:
1,
  TOS: 0 prot: 17, source port 58064, destination port 5355

These TTL=1 are causing the high CPU.


On 24 Apr 2009, at 14:26, Chris Lane wrote:

Richard Gallagher found that it was one of my customers sending mcast
packets with a TTL 1. Tried adding ACL's to lower CPU but this
didn't fix.
We shutdown Vlan to verify and CPU came down 40% to adequate levels.

I have a call into out customer notifying them to fix.

Thanks to all for your input

Regards
Chris

2009/4/24 Chris Lane <[email protected]>

Yes with a high preference.

2009/4/24 junior <[email protected]>

Hello.

Does this switch have default route?

Chris Lane wrote:

sh ip traffic IP statistics:
Rcvd:  37788273 total, 24253 local destination
      0 format errors, 0 checksum errors, 9771492 bad hop count
      0 unknown protocol, 27979860 not a gateway
      0 security failures, 0 bad options, 7762670 with options
Opts:  0 end, 0 nop, 0 basic security, 0 loose source route
      0 timestamp, 0 extended security, 0 record route
      0 stream ID, 0 strict source route, 7762670 alert, 0
cipso, 0 ump
      0 other
Frags: 0 reassembled, 0 timeouts, 0 couldn't reassemble
      0 fragmented, 0 couldn't fragment
Bcast: 2884 received, 87 sent
Mcast: 2334 received, 2209 sent
Sent:  24621 generated, 8328118 forwarded
Drop:  4258 encapsulation failed, 0 unresolved, 83 no adjacency
      69 no route, 0 unicast RPF, 0 forced drop
      0 options denied, 0 source IP address zero

ICMP statistics:
Rcvd: 0 format errors, 0 checksum errors, 0 redirects, 0
unreachable
9560 echo, 0 echo reply, 0 mask requests, 0 mask replies, 0
quench
     0 parameter, 0 timestamp, 0 info request, 0 other
     0 irdp solicitations, 0 irdp advertisements
Sent: 0 redirects, 3129 unreachable, 0 echo, 9560 echo reply
     0 mask requests, 0 mask replies, 0 quench, 0 timestamp
     0 info reply, 47 time exceeded, 0 parameter problem
     0 irdp solicitations, 0 irdp advertisements

TCP statistics:
Rcvd: 7710 total, 8 checksum errors, 1 no port
Sent: 6762 total

UDP statistics:
Rcvd: 4615 total, 0 checksum errors, 1430 no port
Sent: 2909 total, 0 forwarded broadcasts

IP-EIGRP statistics:
Rcvd: 0 total
Sent: 0 total

BGP statistics:
Rcvd: 162 total, 1 opens, 0 notifications, 1 updates
     160 keepalives, 0 route-refresh, 0 unrecognized
Sent: 159 total, 1 opens, 0 notifications, 0 updates
     158 keepalives, 0 route-refresh

PIMv2 statistics: Sent/Received
Total: 0/0, 0 checksum errors, 0 format errors
Registers: 0/0 (0 non-rp, 0 non-sm-group), Register Stops: 0/0,
Hellos:
0/0
Join/Prunes: 0/0, Asserts: 0/0, grafts: 0/0
Bootstraps: 0/0, Candidate_RP_Advertisements: 0/0
State-Refresh: 0/0

IGMP statistics: Sent/Received
Total: 0/0, Format errors: 0/0, Checksum errors: 0/0
Host Queries: 0/0, Host Reports: 0/0, Host Leaves: 0/0  DVMRP:
0/0, PIM:
0/0

OSPF statistics:
Rcvd: 2363 total, 0 checksum errors
     1900 hello, 12 database desc, 2 link state req
     345 link state updates, 104 link state acks

Sent: 2231 total
     1904 hello, 11 database desc, 4 link state req
     223 link state updates, 89 link state acks

ARP statistics:
Rcvd: 2254 requests, 82 replies, 0 reverse, 0 other
Sent: 4178 requests, 2447 replies (2 proxy), 0 reverse
Drop due to input queue full: 0

Thanks for looking.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 7:45 AM, junior <[email protected] <mailto:
[email protected]>> wrote:

 Hi,

 Did You check TAC cases?
Can You post this switch current configuration with sh ip traffic
 command output?

 WBR
 Roman A. Nozdrin

 Chris Lane wrote:

     1 routed interface.sh platform ip unicast failed route
     Total of 0 covering fib entries

     Thanks for reply.. I checked earlier regarding sdm.
     Its the same on all of my 3750's i have about 20 of them
     throughout the
     states, this is probably the quietest one in regards to
     bandwidth and
     services.



     On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Brian Turnbow <
[email protected]
     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

how many routed interfaces do you have ( sh ip int brief
         with ip
         addresses ) ?
         if more than 8 change the sdm template to routing

you can use sh platform ip unicast failed route to see
if
         routes are
         failing to be programmed into tcam

         Brian




          ------------------------------
          *From:* Chris Lane [mailto:[email protected]
         <mailto:[email protected]>]
         *Sent:* venerdÄ› 24 aprile 2009 11.17

         *To:* Brian Turnbow
         *Cc:* Peter Rathlev; [email protected]
         <mailto:[email protected]>


         *Subject:* Re: [c-nsp] 3750 High Cpu IP Input

          sh controllers cpu-interface
         ASIC    Rxbiterr   Rxunder    Fwdctfix   Txbuflos
Rxbufloc
           Rxbufdrain


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASIC0 0 0 0 0 0
            0
ASIC1 0 0 0 0 0
            0


cpu-queue-frames retrieved dropped invalid hol-
block
          stray
         ----------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
         ---------- ----------
         rpc               0          0          0          0
0
         stp               1807       0          0          0
0
         ipc               0          0          0          0
0
         routing protocol  1516326    0          0          0
0
         L2 protocol       27         0          0          0
0
         remote console    0          0          0          0
0
         sw forwarding     915        0          0          0
0
         host              2014       0          0          0
0
         broadcast         1766       0          0          0
0
         cbt-to-spt        0          0          0          0
0
         igmp snooping     1518651    0          0          0
0
         icmp              45         0          0          0
0
         logging           0          0          0          0
0
         rpf-fail          0          0          0          0
0
         queue14           0          0          0          0
0
         cpu heartbeat     14116      0          0          0
0

         ODD i have disabled IGMP SNOOPING...

         On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Brian Turnbow
         <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

You can use show controller cpu to help see whats
             going to the cpu
Make sure you have no ip redirects and no proxy arp
on
             all the interfaces.
             How many routed interfaces do you have ?
             The output below for "max" is for 8 routed
interfaces if
             you have more you
             should change to the desktop switching template.
             With your roughly your values for indirectly
connected
             routes and 13 ip
interfaces on a box I needed to switch the template
"sdm
             prefer routing"
             requies reload.

             Regards

             Brian




             -----Original Message-----
             From: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:
             [email protected]
             <mailto:[email protected]>] On
Behalf Of
             Chris Lane
             Sent: venerdÄ› 24 aprile 2009 1.09
             To: Peter Rathlev
             Cc: [email protected]
             <mailto:[email protected]>
             Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 3750 High Cpu IP Input

              sh platform tcam utilization

CAM Utilization for ASIC# 0 Max
                  Used
                                                        Masks/
Values
                Masks/values

              Unicast mac addresses:
784/6272
                     37/235
              IPv4 IGMP groups + multicast routes:
144/1152
                      6/26
              IPv4 unicast directly-connected routes:
784/6272
                     37/235
              IPv4 unicast indirectly-connected routes:
272/2176
                     52/326
IPv4 policy based routing aces: 0/0
                   0/0
              IPv4 qos aces:
528/528
                  18/18
              IPv4 security aces:
1024/1024
                     57/57

             Note: Allocation of TCAM entries per feature uses
a complex algorithm. The above information is meant
             to provide an abstract view of the current TCAM
utilization

             Hope this helps.

             On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Peter Rathlev
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

                 On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 16:15 -0400, Chris Lane
wrote:

This box has been in production for over a
year
                     and doesn't really do
to much as you can see from my orig thread it
                     moves about 11MB.

                     This just started late last night yet we
didn't
                     add any new customer
                     nor did anybody even touch switch as the
device
                     is remote.

                     I read in an older thread regarding same
thing
                     that the person
rebooted and of course it resolved issue. I
am
                     planning to do that
                     Early tomorrow am, but
                     i really want to know what the heck is
causing
this.

                     Yes CEF is running.

What about TCAM utilisation ("show platform tcam
                 utilization")?

                 Regards,
                 Peter




             --
             //CL
              _______________________________________________
             cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
             <mailto:[email protected]>
             https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
             archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-
nsp/



         --
         //CL








--
//CL





--
//CL




--
//CL
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/





--
//CL


_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Reply via email to