Re: [c-nsp] Ethernet Question - Problem with link
Hi Paul, what's about the speed and duplex settings of the 2 Ethernet-ports? regards Mark Paul Stewart wrote: Hi folks... Just looking for a thought - ethernet cable from switch to switch. One side is up/up but other side is up/down Both sides configured properly (access port, no trunking). 6500 on one side and 3560 on the other Cabling problem? It's a new connection... Thanks, Paul ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@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@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] Max performance 6148(A--GE-TX boards
We have a bunch of 65XX with 6148-GE-TX or 6148A-GE-TX boards to connect a large number of servers and different etherchannels between them. When i checked the release notes for 12.2SX, i found the following lines : ... WS-X6148A-GE-TX *Number of ports: 48 Number of port groups: 6 Port ranges per port group: 1-8, 9-16, 17-24, 25-32, 33-40, 41-48 *The aggregate bandwidth of each port group is 1 Gbps. WS-X6148-GE-TX *Number of ports: 48 Number of port groups: 2 Port ranges per port group: 1-24, 25-48 Note WS-X6148-GE-TX, WS-X6148V-GE-TX, and WS-X6148-GE-45AF do not support these features: *More than 1 Gbps of traffic per EtherChannel ... Can anyone comment on this ? Does this mean we can get a max of 6 Gig throughput on a 6148A card and max 2 Gbit on a 6148 ? Or do these numbers only apply to etherchannels ? I don't seem to find the right performance figures for these cards. Thanks for you comments, Wim Holemans ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Has anyone run into this error: %SYS-4-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL
Firstly, I'm no expert in Cisco buffers, but it seems you have failures all the way up to and including the Huge buffer pool, which I would think is most certainly going to result in packet drop. Secondly, I did come across a bug which looks awefully like the message you are seeing. 006349: Jul 24 00:08:56.164 AEST: %SYS-4-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL: Could not allocate chunks for CEF: arp throt Total free: 0, Total inuse: 500, Cause : Not a dynamic chunk -Process= interrupt level, ipl= 1 -Traceback= 0x60635A94 0x60799A98 0x60799AFC 0x614551D8 0x614950A8 0x6016FC94 0x60173F28 0x6084085C 0x60773520 TAC response was i was being affected by bug CSCsj25679 Symptom: %SYS-2-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL messages on c7200 router while sending traffic Conditions: %SYS-2-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL messages on c7200 router can be seen while box is so much stress with traffic with higher size of packets. (=512bytes) Workaround: There is no workaround. These messages not impacting any service like traffic and sessions drop. Hi Matt, The bug was first found in version 12.4(13.13)T6 and was first fixed in 12.4(16.13). The developer of CSCsj25679 confirmed that your issue is the same with the bug. However, he still haven't verified the mainline release on which this bug was first found. ... By the way, developer informed me that CSCsj25679 was first seen in 12.4(13.10). I just recently installed a new 7206VXR/NPE-G2 router, and looking at the logging output I am seeing the following: Oct 23 11:27:51.705 EDT: %SYS-4-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL: Could not allocate chunks for CEF: arp throt Total free: 0, Total inuse: 500, Cause : Not a dynamic chunk -Process= interrupt level, ipl= 1, pid= 77, -Traceback= 0x13D5688 0x20974 0x20428 0x172B074 0x8BB14 0x686EFC 0x68AAD0 0x682A84 0x66D44C 0x66C328 0x671D50 0x66DA90 0x66C3E4 0x19DDCB4 0x19DDA3C 0x19DB0EC ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Has anyone run into this error: %SYS-4-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL
Matt, that sounds like a real good possibility, as we stream lots of video/images, to the tune of a few hundred mb/sec on a constant basis. So I would very much expect out packet size to be large. I take it this is a fix that will have to be rolled into IOS from the sounds of it, not something adjusting buffers will fix.. Guess I will just let it ride as all seems to be running OK, router hasn't crashed so far (knock on wood), and see what the next IOS update brings.. Thanks for the reply... --- Howard Leadmon -Original Message- From: Matt Carter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 2:47 AM To: 'Howard Leadmon'; 'Gregory Boehnlein'; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Has anyone run into this error: %SYS-4-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL Firstly, I'm no expert in Cisco buffers, but it seems you have failures all the way up to and including the Huge buffer pool, which I would think is most certainly going to result in packet drop. Secondly, I did come across a bug which looks awefully like the message you are seeing. 006349: Jul 24 00:08:56.164 AEST: %SYS-4-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL: Could not allocate chunks for CEF: arp throt Total free: 0, Total inuse: 500, Cause : Not a dynamic chunk -Process= interrupt level, ipl= 1 -Traceback= 0x60635A94 0x60799A98 0x60799AFC 0x614551D8 0x614950A8 0x6016FC94 0x60173F28 0x6084085C 0x60773520 TAC response was i was being affected by bug CSCsj25679 Symptom: %SYS-2-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL messages on c7200 router while sending traffic Conditions: %SYS-2-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL messages on c7200 router can be seen while box is so much stress with traffic with higher size of packets. (=512bytes) Workaround: There is no workaround. These messages not impacting any service like traffic and sessions drop. Hi Matt, The bug was first found in version 12.4(13.13)T6 and was first fixed in 12.4(16.13). The developer of CSCsj25679 confirmed that your issue is the same with the bug. However, he still haven't verified the mainline release on which this bug was first found. ... By the way, developer informed me that CSCsj25679 was first seen in 12.4(13.10). ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Full net table too large for Sup720 already?
Depending on your use, look at the SUP720-3BXL or the RSP720-3CXL (if you are using a 7600). The Sup720-3B isn't really geared towards applications needing a full Internet table. We are going through this with the SUP32. Both are limited to 256k routes (the SUP32 is 239k for ipv4) and the Internet routing table is 234k so there isn't much life in these products on the Internet! We decided on the RSP720 since the cost difference wasn't that much and it felt like the RSP was a direct replacement for the SUP so it may become EOL sooner! ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Problems adding VLAN's to portchannel trunk
channel-group 1 mode desirable This is setup for dynamic make sure its set to on on both sides you only need to add the vlan configuration to the port channel interface it will apply to all physcial interfaces that are members of that group From: Murphy, William [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 5:16 PM To: Mike Louis; Nate Carlson; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Problems adding VLAN's to portchannel trunk We have an HP Blade Center also and our switch is hard coded to on... Don't think the HP boxes support pAgP... Bill Murphy Senior Network Analyst University of Texas Health Science Center - Houston -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Louis Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 3:54 PM To: Nate Carlson; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Problems adding VLAN's to portchannel trunk When the channel goes down is it err-disabled because of port-channel misconfig? You could set the sides to channel-group 1 mode on on each side and then add the vlan. that should work. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nate Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 3:53 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] Problems adding VLAN's to portchannel trunk We've got a 6509 [12.2(17a)SX1] connected to a couple switches in a HP c-Class blade chassis, which are Cisco 3020's [CBS30X0-LANBASE-M, 12.2(25)SEF1]. We've got an issue where we can't add a VLAN to the trunk without it going down because of VLAN mismatch while we are trying to add it to all three interfaces on each side (the two gig's, and the portchannel interface.] Here's what our config looks like; if anyone has advice on how we could add VLAN's to the allowed list without the links dropping, I'd love to hear it! 3020: ! interface Port-channel1 switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,20,25 switchport mode trunk spanning-tree link-type shared ! interface GigabitEthernet0/17 description description Trunk to cat1 (6509) port 6/19 switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,20,25 switchport mode trunk channel-group 1 mode desirable spanning-tree link-type shared ! interface GigabitEthernet0/18 description description Trunk to cat1 (6509) port 7/19 switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,20,25 switchport mode trunk channel-group 1 mode desirable spanning-tree link-type shared ! 6509: ! interface Port-channel1 description hp c-class switch port 6/19, 7/19 no ip address flowcontrol receive on switchport switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,20,25 switchport mode trunk switchport nonegotiate spanning-tree link-type shared ! interface GigabitEthernet6/19 description trunk to hp c-class port 0/17 no ip address logging event link-status flowcontrol receive on switchport switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,20,25 switchport mode trunk switchport nonegotiate spanning-tree link-type shared channel-group 1 mode desirable ! interface GigabitEthernet7/19 description trunk to hp c-class port 0/18 no ip address logging event link-status flowcontrol receive on switchport switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,20,25 switchport mode trunk switchport nonegotiate spanning-tree link-type shared channel-group 1 mode desirable ! | nate carlson | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.natecarlson.com | | depriving some poor village of its idiot since 1981| ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ Note: This message and any attachments is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, legally privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or return email and destroy or delete this message along with any attachments immediately. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ Note: This message and any attachments is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that
Re: [c-nsp] Risk of enabling ip accounting
4948s support netflow in later versions of code. Couldnt' you use that instead. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gert Doering [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 5:27 PM To: Vincent De Keyzer Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Risk of enabling ip accounting Hi, On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 10:37:56PM +0200, Vincent De Keyzer wrote: what is the level of risk involved in enabling IP accounting on an interface? Instant CPU death... More specifically, this is about a Catalyst 4948 doing L2/L3 and switching a total of 100 Mbits in and out (CPU is around 15%). I can't speak for the 4948, but my gut feeling is that you won't see proper numbers in there - most likely it will permit it, but then only count packets that the CPU sees, but none of the packets being forwarde by hardware. (Which is what happens in 12.1 on the 3750s). gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [EMAIL PROTECTED] fax: +49-89-35655025[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ Note: This message and any attachments is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, legally privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or return email and destroy or delete this message along with any attachments immediately. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] Cisco 1721 with WIC-1ENET - dot1q
Hello *, I have a Cisco 1721 with a WIC-1ENET. I am able to put encapsulation dot1q on FastEthernet0 but not on Ethernet0. Is it software or hardware related? Thanks. Thierry ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] Access List matches on Cat6500
Hi On a Cisco 6500 with Access lists applied to an SVI, when a packet matches a rule on that access list how often is the matches counter incremented with the 6500 forwarding in hardware, and is it incremented on any packet type i.e. if the SYN bit is set or not. Sorry if this is an obvious question but I can find anything on Google for this. Any links to Cisco Docs on this much appreciated. Kind Regards Kev ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 1721 with WIC-1ENET - dot1q
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:cisco-nsp- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thierry De Vriendt Sent: 25 October 2007 12:33 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco 1721 with WIC-1ENET - dot1q Hello *, I have a Cisco 1721 with a WIC-1ENET. I am able to put encapsulation dot1q on FastEthernet0 but not on Ethernet0. You can only create sub interfaces on a fastethernet or higher Cheers Peter Is it software or hardware related? Thanks. Thierry ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@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@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] T1 CSU/DSU WIC output issue
Thanks Richard. I tried 12.4(17), which of course included a reload, still have the same result: -2650#sh service-mod s0/0 Interface Serial0/0 Module type is T1/fractional Hardware revision is 0.96, Software revision is 20050811-0.3, Image checksum is 0x80ACD1B3, Protocol revision is 0.1 Receiver has no alarms. Framing is ESF, Line Code is B8ZS, Current clock source is line, Fraction has 24 timeslots (64 Kbits/sec each), Net bandwidth is 1536 Kbits/sec. Last module self-test (done at startup): Passed Last clearing of alarm counters 07:23:16 loss of signal:0, loss of frame :0, AIS alarm :0, Remote alarm :0, Module access errors :0, Total Data (last 0 15 minute intervals): 0 Line Code Violations, 0 Path Code Violations 0 Slip Secs, 0 Fr Loss Secs, 0 Line Err Secs, 0 Degraded Mins 0 Errored Secs, 0 Bursty Err Secs, 0 Severely Err Secs, 0 Unavail Secs Data in current interval (0 seconds elapsed): 0 Line Code Violations, 0 Path Code Violations 0 Slip Secs, 0 Fr Loss Secs, 0 Line Err Secs, 0 Degraded Mins 0 Errored Secs, 0 Bursty Err Secs, 0 Severely Err Secs, 0 Unavail Secs -2650# Anyone else have an idea? Bug navigator didn't find anything. Not sure what would cause the module to stop keeping track of DSU history Chuck Church Principal Network Engineer, CCIE #8776 Harris Information Technology Services EDS Contractor - Navy Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) 1210 N. Parker Rd. | Greenville, SC 29609 Office: 864-335-9473 | Cell: 864-266-3978 -Original Message- From: Richard Golodner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 11:20 PM To: Church, Charles Subject: RE: [c-nsp] T1 CSU/DSU WIC output issue I looked at this and had a buddy double check to make sure I wasn't missing anything. It all looks good as far as I can gather. Before you reseat the WIC, can you reload the router? It will clear all the counters, but you should start to see some historical data in there. You could also yank the RJ-45 from it and see what that gets you too. Richard -Original Message- From: Church, Charles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 11:44 PM To: Richard Golodner Subject: RE: [c-nsp] T1 CSU/DSU WIC output issue Sure, here is the running config, with unrelated stuff removed. Everything logging, serial interface, etc is still in there. Show service module is below in original post, just checked, it still shows no intervals. I'm going to try resetting the service module in a little while. Thanks, Chuck Church Principal Network Engineer, CCIE #8776 Harris Information Technology Services EDS Contractor - Navy Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) 1210 N. Parker Rd. | Greenville, SC 29609 Office: 864-335-9473 | Cell: 864-266-3978 -Original Message- From: Richard Golodner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:31 PM To: Church, Charles Subject: RE: [c-nsp] T1 CSU/DSU WIC output issue Chuck, can you post or send me a show service-module and a sanitized running-config. I deal with this all the time. What kind of logging do you have configured on that box? Richard -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Church, Charles Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:26 PM To: nsp Subject: [c-nsp] T1 CSU/DSU WIC output issue Hey all, Working on a problem with a funky T1 going into a WIC-1DSU-T1 on a 2650 running 12.4(16). Output shows this: x-2650#sh service-mod s0/0 Interface Serial0/0 Module type is T1/fractional Hardware revision is 0.96, Software revision is 20050811-0.3, Image checksum is 0x80ACD1B3, Protocol revision is 0.1 Receiver has no alarms. Framing is ESF, Line Code is B8ZS, Current clock source is line, Fraction has 24 timeslots (64 Kbits/sec each), Net bandwidth is 1536 Kbits/sec. Last module self-test (done at startup): Passed Last clearing of alarm counters 7w5d loss of signal:1, last occurred 7w1d loss of frame :4, last occurred 02:49:07 AIS alarm :2, last occurred 02:49:07 Remote alarm :0, Module access errors :0, Total Data (last 0 15 minute intervals): 0 Line Code Violations, 0 Path Code Violations 0 Slip Secs, 0 Fr Loss Secs, 0 Line Err Secs, 0 Degraded Mins 0 Errored Secs, 0 Bursty Err Secs, 0 Severely Err Secs, 0 Unavail Secs Data in current interval (0 seconds elapsed): 0 Line Code Violations, 0 Path Code Violations 0 Slip Secs, 0 Fr Loss Secs, 0 Line Err Secs, 0 Degraded Mins 0 Errored Secs, 0 Bursty Err Secs, 0 Severely Err Secs, 0 Unavail Secs x-2650# Router has been up for 8 weeks. Any idea why this service module isn't storing any historical data in the 'Total Data' or 'Data in current interval' sections? Never seen this before, but then again not sure if I've ever looked at the service module output on this particular
Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 1721 with WIC-1ENET - dot1q
I have a Cisco 1721 with a WIC-1ENET. I am able to put encapsulation dot1q on FastEthernet0 but not on Ethernet0. You can only create sub interfaces on a fastethernet or higher Cheers Peter Ahmmm, if I remember correctly, there was an update once that made it possible to create subinterfaces on the 2610 onboard ETHERNET interface. So I guess this might somehow be software related... Maybe a newer version of the IOS for the 1721 makes this possible, too. Greets, Bernd ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 1721 with WIC-1ENET - dot1q
Hi You can only create sub interfaces on a fastethernet or higher It's hardware and software related. On a 2610 you can create SubInterfaces (dot1.q only) on ethernet devices. Ethernet0/0 is up, line protocol is up Hardware is AmdP2, address is 0050.500f.58a0 (bia 0050.500f.58a0) MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec, reliability 255/255, txload 7/255, rxload 1/255 Encapsulation 802.1Q Virtual LAN, Vlan ID 1., loopback not set possible to create subinterfaces on the 2610 onboard ETHERNET interface. So I guess this might somehow be software related... Maybe a newer version of the IOS for the 1721 makes this possible, too. As far as I rember the 1721 has a different on board chip. Regards Erich ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] Cisco 7600 RSP720 / SRB2 Woes
Hi All, I'm just wondering if anyone here is running SRB2 with any tunnel configs. Specifically v6 over v4 tunnels (either GRE or IPv6IP). We rolled up to SRB2 from SRB1 last night, and the tunnel issues are the first of my woes. Basically, at completely random times, the tunnels die, and don't come back until you reload the router. The interface itself still reports up, the line protocol reports down. Second issue, if you're running SRB2 and you upgraded to it using ISSU, downgrading back to SRB1 using ISSU doesn't work either. When we tested this on two different routers both times in the downgrade process the router claimed config sync errors (the config had not changed since the upgrade btw). Third issue, in the last 12 hours I've had 6 different V6 BGP sessions go idle and sit there like that completely randomly, connectivity between the neighbors was still there, but that was that, again, this would only come right after router reload. Any experiences on these issues would be appreciated, my tac requests will follow shortly after this email, but figured I'd ask here as well, both for advice and a warning... My experiences with SRB2 have left me brusied and battered the way not even SRB original release did... And that was bad enough. Andrew Alston TENET ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Has anyone run into this error: %SYS-4-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 04:47:10PM +1000, Matt Carter wrote: Firstly, I'm no expert in Cisco buffers, but it seems you have failures all the way up to and including the Huge buffer pool, which I would think is most certainly going to result in packet drop. Yes. But those buffers are *only* for process switched packets. We call them system buffers. Transient packets being forwarded under interrupt use private particle pools and are not impacted for those packets. Secondly, I did come across a bug which looks awefully like the message you are seeing. 006349: Jul 24 00:08:56.164 AEST: %SYS-4-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL: Could not allocate chunks for CEF: arp throt Total free: 0, Total inuse: 500, Cause : Not a dynamic chunk -Process= interrupt level, ipl= 1 -Traceback= 0x60635A94 0x60799A98 0x60799AFC 0x614551D8 0x614950A8 0x6016FC94 0x60173F28 0x6084085C 0x60773520 This is some punt protection changes that were put in place. TAC response was i was being affected by bug CSCsj25679 Yep. That's the right bug. Symptom: %SYS-2-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL messages on c7200 router while sending traffic Conditions: %SYS-2-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL messages on c7200 router can be seen while box is so much stress with traffic with higher size of packets. (=512bytes) Workaround: There is no workaround. These messages not impacting any service like traffic and sessions drop. Hi Matt, The bug was first found in version 12.4(13.13)T6 and was first fixed in 12.4(16.13). The developer of CSCsj25679 confirmed that your issue is the same with the bug. However, he still haven't verified the mainline release on which this bug was first found. ... By the way, developer informed me that CSCsj25679 was first seen in 12.4(13.10). I just recently installed a new 7206VXR/NPE-G2 router, and looking at the logging output I am seeing the following: Oct 23 11:27:51.705 EDT: %SYS-4-CHUNKMALLOCFAIL: Could not allocate chunks for CEF: arp throt Total free: 0, Total inuse: 500, Cause : Not a dynamic chunk -Process= interrupt level, ipl= 1, pid= 77, -Traceback= 0x13D5688 0x20974 0x20428 0x172B074 0x8BB14 0x686EFC 0x68AAD0 0x682A84 0x66D44C 0x66C328 0x671D50 0x66DA90 0x66C3E4 0x19DDCB4 0x19DDA3C 0x19DB0EC ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@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@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] OC-12 POS
I need to upgrade my backbone from OC-3 to OC-12. Is there a POS OC-12 card for the 72xx series? If I have to upgrade to 73xx or something then I might as well look at juniper right? Recommendations? Thanks. Natambu Obleton Network Engineer FastTrack Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (970) 247-3366 office (970) 247-2426 fax ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] OC-12 POS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I don't think Cisco has POS OC12 card for 72xx series. Though they have DPT OC12 card for 72xx series. Hyun Natambu Obleton wrote: I need to upgrade my backbone from OC-3 to OC-12. Is there a POS OC-12 card for the 72xx series? If I have to upgrade to 73xx or something then I might as well look at juniper right? Recommendations? Thanks. Natambu Obleton Network Engineer FastTrack Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (970) 247-3366 office (970) 247-2426 fax ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHISoGZkEzJIVS03MRAtx1AKCa2Gn6+6uKW+NgGt9Dcqqiix8AeQCgtDph AQjI2GPRdUTP/OpMVi4QbpI= =OpqE -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] OC-12 POS
They do have a DPT but you wont get OC12 on it. The 7200 just can't do that much. The card will allow and OC12 through it. Aaron On 10/25/07, Hyunseog Ryu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I don't think Cisco has POS OC12 card for 72xx series. Though they have DPT OC12 card for 72xx series. Hyun Natambu Obleton wrote: I need to upgrade my backbone from OC-3 to OC-12. Is there a POS OC-12 card for the 72xx series? If I have to upgrade to 73xx or something then I might as well look at juniper right? Recommendations? Thanks. Natambu Obleton Network Engineer FastTrack Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (970) 247-3366 office (970) 247-2426 fax ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHISoGZkEzJIVS03MRAtx1AKCa2Gn6+6uKW+NgGt9Dcqqiix8AeQCgtDph AQjI2GPRdUTP/OpMVi4QbpI= =OpqE -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@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@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] WS-X6408A-GBIC cannot powered up
Hi all, I just want to know if any of you has same problem as I did with my WS-X6408A-GBIC. It just died with messages below. Any attempt to power on the modules (by 'power enable module') only works for 30 seconds, and it goes down again. *Oct 19 22:55:00.112 JAVT: %OIR-SP-3-PWRCYCLE: Card in module 2, is being power-cycled off (Module not responding to Keep Alive polling) *Oct 19 22:55:00.184 JAVT: %C6KPWR-SP-4-DISABLED: power to module in slot 2 set off (Module not responding to Keep Alive polling) *Oct 19 22:55:25.588 JAVT: %PM_SCP-SP-4-UNK_OPCODE: Received unknown unsolicited message from module 2, opcode 0x107 *Oct 19 22:55:39.216 JAVT: %OSPF-5-ADJCHG: Process 5, Nbr 167.205.108.60 on Vlan59 from FULL to DOWN, Neighbor Down: Dead timer expired *Oct 19 22:56:09.912 JAVT: %SM-SP-4-BADEVENT: Event 'running' is invalid for the current state 'wait_til_ready': scp_dnld_module 2 : 0 -Traceback= 602007D4 601BE08C 601BE3D0 600EE93C 600EE928 *Oct 19 22:56:55.588 JAVT: %ONLINE-SP-6-TIMER: Module 2, Proc. 0. Failed to bring online because of timer event *Oct 19 22:56:55.588 JAVT: %C6KPWR-SP-4-DISABLED: power to module in slot 2 set off (Module not responding to Keep Alive polling) Thanks! -affan ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Managed, cheap, DC powered switch
Eric Helm wrote: Brandon Bennett wrote: I work for a telco and have a need for cheap managed switches that are DC powered. Cisco's line up is a 2950-24-DC. Haven't kept up much with Cisco's product line for 1U DC lately. Last I knew only a 24 port 2950 or 3550 were available for a cheap 1U DC switch. Foundry's FastIron Edge X Series is very reasonably priced, but 1.5U for 48 ports. It may be overkill for what you are looking for though with full L3 and 10GbE capabilities. ME-2400-24TS-D http://tinyurl.com/2nnx7z ME-3400-24TS-D ME-3400G-12CS-D http://tinyurl.com/yues25 ME-C3750-24TE-M w/ PWR-ME3750-DC(-R) http://tinyurl.com/3e2pgl The 3560E and 3750E series are also available with DC power supplies. http://tinyurl.com/24rg2l The 4900s (ME and non-ME) as well as all the larger chassis-based solutions but those would be cost-prohibitive for your application. If you don't need fancy features then you can buy the cheapest licenses to save more $$$. Justin ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Managed, cheap, DC powered switch
The 3560E and 3750E are not available with DC power. I wish they were!! Justin Shore wrote: Eric Helm wrote: Brandon Bennett wrote: I work for a telco and have a need for cheap managed switches that are DC powered. Cisco's line up is a 2950-24-DC. Haven't kept up much with Cisco's product line for 1U DC lately. Last I knew only a 24 port 2950 or 3550 were available for a cheap 1U DC switch. Foundry's FastIron Edge X Series is very reasonably priced, but 1.5U for 48 ports. It may be overkill for what you are looking for though with full L3 and 10GbE capabilities. ME-2400-24TS-D http://tinyurl.com/2nnx7z ME-3400-24TS-D ME-3400G-12CS-D http://tinyurl.com/yues25 ME-C3750-24TE-M w/ PWR-ME3750-DC(-R) http://tinyurl.com/3e2pgl The 3560E and 3750E series are also available with DC power supplies. http://tinyurl.com/24rg2l The 4900s (ME and non-ME) as well as all the larger chassis-based solutions but those would be cost-prohibitive for your application. If you don't need fancy features then you can buy the cheapest licenses to save more $$$. Justin ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@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@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Managed, cheap, DC powered switch
The DC Power Supply has to be ordered seperately. Don't know what I would do with the AC that came with it if I required DC. -- http://dcp.dcptech.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Murphy, William Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 11:25 PM To: Dan Armstrong; Justin Shore Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Managed, cheap, DC powered switch According to the Cisco Summer/Fall 2007 QRG the 3560-E and 3750-E both have support for DC power... Refer to page 2-14 and 2-20, last line in the table AC/DC support Bill Murphy Senior Network Analyst University of Texas Health Science Center - Houston -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Armstrong Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 9:38 PM To: Justin Shore Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Managed, cheap, DC powered switch The 3560E and 3750E are not available with DC power. I wish they were!! Justin Shore wrote: Eric Helm wrote: Brandon Bennett wrote: I work for a telco and have a need for cheap managed switches that are DC powered. Cisco's line up is a 2950-24-DC. Haven't kept up much with Cisco's product line for 1U DC lately. Last I knew only a 24 port 2950 or 3550 were available for a cheap 1U DC switch. Foundry's FastIron Edge X Series is very reasonably priced, but 1.5U for 48 ports. It may be overkill for what you are looking for though with full L3 and 10GbE capabilities. ME-2400-24TS-D http://tinyurl.com/2nnx7z ME-3400-24TS-D ME-3400G-12CS-D http://tinyurl.com/yues25 ME-C3750-24TE-M w/ PWR-ME3750-DC(-R) http://tinyurl.com/3e2pgl The 3560E and 3750E series are also available with DC power supplies. http://tinyurl.com/24rg2l The 4900s (ME and non-ME) as well as all the larger chassis-based solutions but those would be cost-prohibitive for your application. If you don't need fancy features then you can buy the cheapest licenses to save more $$$. Justin ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@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@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@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@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Managed, cheap, DC powered switch
According to the Cisco Summer/Fall 2007 QRG the 3560-E and 3750-E both have support for DC power... Refer to page 2-14 and 2-20, last line in the table AC/DC support Bill Murphy Senior Network Analyst University of Texas Health Science Center - Houston -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Armstrong Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 9:38 PM To: Justin Shore Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Managed, cheap, DC powered switch The 3560E and 3750E are not available with DC power. I wish they were!! Justin Shore wrote: Eric Helm wrote: Brandon Bennett wrote: I work for a telco and have a need for cheap managed switches that are DC powered. Cisco's line up is a 2950-24-DC. Haven't kept up much with Cisco's product line for 1U DC lately. Last I knew only a 24 port 2950 or 3550 were available for a cheap 1U DC switch. Foundry's FastIron Edge X Series is very reasonably priced, but 1.5U for 48 ports. It may be overkill for what you are looking for though with full L3 and 10GbE capabilities. ME-2400-24TS-D http://tinyurl.com/2nnx7z ME-3400-24TS-D ME-3400G-12CS-D http://tinyurl.com/yues25 ME-C3750-24TE-M w/ PWR-ME3750-DC(-R) http://tinyurl.com/3e2pgl The 3560E and 3750E series are also available with DC power supplies. http://tinyurl.com/24rg2l The 4900s (ME and non-ME) as well as all the larger chassis-based solutions but those would be cost-prohibitive for your application. If you don't need fancy features then you can buy the cheapest licenses to save more $$$. Justin ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@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@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@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
