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 <[email protected]>: > 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 <[email protected]>: > >> 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 < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Mmm no, I think it doesn't work on MX80 / MX104. >>> >>> JR. >>> >>> >>> 2017-03-19 23:14 GMT-03:00 Olivier Benghozi <[email protected] >>> >: >>> >>> > What about bypass-queuing-chip on MIC interfaces ? Would it work on >>> > MX80/104 ? >>> > >>> > > On 20 march 2017 at 01:32, Saku Ytti <[email protected]> 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 < >>> [email protected]> >>> > 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 <[email protected]>: >>> > >>> >>> > >>> 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 < >>> [email protected] >>> > > >>> > >>> 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 <[email protected]>: >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>>> 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 < >>> > [email protected]> >>> > >>>>> 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 [email protected] >>> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Atte. >>> >>> Javier I. Rodríguez Sotelo >>> _______________________________________________ >>> juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >>> >> >> > > > -- > Atte. > > Javier I. Rodríguez Sotelo > > -- Atte. Javier I. Rodríguez Sotelo _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
