Re: [c-nsp] BGP traffic engineering
Then, how to manage a link failure? you mean create templates? then those prefixes are divided to customers and those customers are usually upgrading there subscriptions. Waseem From: Mark Tinka mti...@globaltransit.net To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net; Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2011 2:51 PM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP traffic engineering On Sunday, October 23, 2011 06:03:27 PM Waseem wrote: Hi, Is there any application to manage and traffic engineer BGP prefixes among multiple circuits? It's possible that there could be some automated way to do this (either off-the-shelf or in-house), but What I do know is that most folks manage this by-hand. Mark. ___ 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] BGP traffic engineering
Hi, Is there any application to manage and traffic engineer BGP prefixes among multiple circuits? Regards, Waseem ___ 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] Realtime packet analysis
Hi, I'm facing several problems in different parts of the network and I want to capture the traffic for 24Hr of a link nearly 1Gigabit/sec utilized, is there any tool that can analyze this size of data in real-time. Regards, Waseem ___ 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] CPU utilization for handling interrupt
Hi, I'm seeing the following output for show interface gig x/y switching ROUTER#sh inter gig x/y switching GigabitEthernet x/y Throttle count 0 Drops RP 0 SP 0 SPD Flushes Fast 0 SSE 0 SPD Aggress Fast 0 SPD Priority Inputs 46670 Drops 0 Protocol Path Pkts In Chars In Pkts Out Chars Out Other Process 1078379 69124236 1 96 Cache misses 0 Fast 0 0 0 0 Auton/SSE 0 0 0 0 IP Process 3594269215 341714357335 162336237 18154131440 Cache misses 0 Fast 395280896627 35724688800466 406469605169 44781968153216 Auton/SSE 1220084333084 240117721335247 1899837692532 1757256129434539 ARP Process 28158607 1689516436 31556627 3029436192 Cache misses 0 Fast 0 0 0 0 Auton/SSE 0 0 0 0 The IP Process and IP Fast are accumulating . The config. of the interface is as follows: -- interface GigabitEthernet x/y ip address x.x.x.x x.x.x.x ip verify unicast source reachable-via rx allow-default no ip redirects no ip proxy-arp ip tcp adjust-mss 1400 speed nonegotiate no cdp enable service-policy input POLICY service-policy output POLICY end Regard, Waseem ___ 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] CPU utilization for handling interrupt
It is a regular internet traffic to port 80, from our customers, which should be CEF switched. From: Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.uk To: Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 2:07 PM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] CPU utilization for handling interrupt On 05/10/11 12:05, Waseem wrote: 7600+RSP720-3C-GE 12.2(33)SRB2 why I'm seeing 10% CPU utilization by interrupt handling? Try using a SPAN of the CPU to see what traffic is hitting the CPU; this is by far the quickest way to find the cause. ___ 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] CPU utilization for handling interrupt
7600+RSP720-3C-GE 12.2(33)SRB2 why I'm seeing 10% CPU utilization by interrupt handling? From: Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.uk To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 1:41 PM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] CPU utilization for handling interrupt On 05/10/11 09:31, Waseem wrote: Hi, I'm seeing the following output for show interface gig x/y switching What platform? What IOS version? And what is your question? ___ 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] CPU utilization for handling interrupt
I'm not receiving that log, I have nearly 600Mbps on this link, nearly 3 - 6 Mbps is being process switched from this link only, I tried to disable it, the CPU due to interrupt got 0%. please check the following packets. -- interface Gi1/9, routine process_rx_packet_inline dbus info: src_vlan 0x406(1030), src_indx 0x8(8), len 0x42(66) bpdu 0, index_dir 0, flood 0, dont_lrn 0, dest_indx 0x380(896) B8020401 0406 0008 4200 00060530 0E40 0380 destmac 00.1E.13.E4.A2.00, srcmac 00.25.9E.20.7A.D0, protocol 0800 protocol ip: version 0x04, hlen 0x05, tos 0x00, totlen 48, identifier 6637 df 1, mf 0, fo 0, ttl 126, src 109.127.86.37, dst 209.85.145.105 tcp src 63915, dst 80, seq 2253251144, ack 0, win 16384 off 7 checksum 0xBA29 syn --- interface Gi1/9, routine naboo_fastsend dbus info: src_vlan 0x406(1030), src_indx 0x380(896), len 0x46(70) bpdu 0, index_dir 0, flood 0, dont_lrn 0, dest_indx 0x380(896) 0002 04062800 0380 4600 00060560 0040 0380 destmac 00.25.9E.20.7A.D0, srcmac 00.1E.13.E4.A2.00, protocol 0800 layer 3 data: 4534 5DCA4000 3706F051 57F8D9C0 6D7F5670 005052A5 845F754B EC784102 8012 00E2 02040514 01030304 0402 001E688A 0413 0340 interface Gi1/9, routine process_rx_packet_inline dbus info: src_vlan 0x406(1030), src_indx 0x8(8), len 0x42(66) bpdu 0, index_dir 0, flood 0, dont_lrn 0, dest_indx 0x380(896) E0020401 0406 0008 4200 00060520 0E40 0380 destmac 00.1E.13.E4.A2.00, srcmac 00.25.9E.20.7A.D0, protocol 0800 protocol ip: version 0x04, hlen 0x05, tos 0x00, totlen 48, identifier 7783 df 1, mf 0, fo 0, ttl 126, src 109.127.86.8, dst 95.211.87.169 tcp src 29827, dst 80, seq 2269663441, ack 0, win 8192 off 7 checksum 0x9B2E syn - interface Gi1/9, routine process_rx_packet_inline dbus info: src_vlan 0x406(1030), src_indx 0x8(8), len 0x4E(78) bpdu 0, index_dir 0, flood 0, dont_lrn 0, dest_indx 0x380(896) 10020401 0406 0008 4E00 00060550 0E40 0380 destmac 00.1E.13.E4.A2.00, srcmac 00.25.9E.20.7A.D0, protocol 0800 protocol ip: version 0x04, hlen 0x05, tos 0x00, totlen 60, identifier 28750 df 1, mf 0, fo 0, ttl 126, src 109.127.86.29, dst 207.66.182.20 tcp src 58557, dst 80, seq 2150691164, ack 0, win 8192 off 10 checksum 0xD911 syn -- those are captured from dumping the CPU. do you find anything that make them need special handling? regards, Waseem From: Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org To: Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com Cc: NSP cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 3:20 PM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] CPU utilization for handling interrupt On 05/10/2011 12:15, Waseem wrote: It is a regular internet traffic to port 80, from our customers, which should be CEF switched. Sounds like your router is punting all traffic. Are you seeing the following errors in your logs? %CFIB-SP-7-CFIB_EXCEPTION : FIB TCAM exception, Some entries will be software switched If this is the case, you need to drop the number of routes that the box is handling, and then reboot the system. Once the FIB limits are exceeded on this platform, rebooting is the only way to revert to hardware forwarding. Nick ___ 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] CPU utilization for handling interrupt
Hi, TCP adjust-mss is the key, you were right. Thanks Waseem From: Pete Lumbis alum...@gmail.com To: Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org Cc: Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com; NSP cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 4:15 PM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] CPU utilization for handling interrupt TCP Adjust-mss causes the 6k to punt the SYN to SW. I'm not sure if this will be process switched or CEF switched (interrupt), but I don't see a reason why we couldn't do it in software CEF. -Pete On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: On 05/10/2011 12:15, Waseem wrote: It is a regular internet traffic to port 80, from our customers, which should be CEF switched. Sounds like your router is punting all traffic. Are you seeing the following errors in your logs? %CFIB-SP-7-CFIB_EXCEPTION : FIB TCAM exception, Some entries will be software switched If this is the case, you need to drop the number of routes that the box is handling, and then reboot the system. Once the FIB limits are exceeded on this platform, rebooting is the only way to revert to hardware forwarding. Nick ___ 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] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K
how do you route for customers who don't have BGP? /30 on the interface then static route the prefix or the prefix on the inteface? because, the latter causes a lot of ARP and Spanning tree traffic. Waseem - Original Message - From: Kevin Loch kl...@kl.net To: NSP cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Cc: Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 1:26 AM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K 70% seems *really* high an for rsp720. Are you sure it's not a sup720? The two have vastly different cpu performance (about 10x it seems). I have several rsp720 with many full bgp transit feeds + peer routes and my typical cpu usage is only 10%. What IOS image are you running and what else are you doing on this box besides bgp that could be eating cpu? I had one rsp720 recently (curiously the only one I have seen with 4g ram instead of 2g) that had 70% cpu usage after a few bgp sessions came up. The 'show ibc' output indicated several hundred thousand pps to and from the RP so something was obviously wrong. Swapped out with a different rsp720 and everything was fine (10% cpu, 100pps on IBC). - Kevin Manuel Marín wrote: We are using the RSP720 and 3CXLs. Both have performance issues when dealing with multiple BGP sessions, When one of the full bgp peer flaps or when there is a link flap the other routing protocols start to flap as well. I'll try to tweak the timers in the mean time. Usually the CPU usage is around 70%. On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi Manuel, What are the supervisor engines that you are using on the 7600 routers. Regards, Waseem On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 6:47 AM, Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, We've been in the same situation, a small note: per slot capacity of the ASR9K is 320G it takes 40G and 100G SPAs while for NE40E-X3 is 40G, almost the same as Cisco's 7600. Regards, Waseem -- *From:* Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net *To:* cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net *Sent:* Wednesday, September 28, 2011 9:56 AM *Subject:* [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K Hi We are currently looking for alternatives to upgrade cisco 76XX routers and we are comparing Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco ASR9K. I was wondering if someone can share their experience with Huawey routers as Core MPLS routers. Any advice would be greatly appreciated Thanks ___ 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/ -- Manuel Marín Transtelco Inc. 1.9152172232 ___ 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] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K
Hi Manuel, What are the supervisor engines that you are using on the 7600 routers. Regards, Waseem From: Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net To: Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 6:27 PM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K Hi Waseem Thanks for your reply. They mentioned that the backplane was 200Gbps and actually I was considering the 8 port 10G card but this came from a marketing/sales guy so I don't know if this is true or not. I will double check and will ask the RD or technical guys to confirm this info. We are trying to replace cisco 76XX because CPU speed. We are using the 76XX for peering purposes and when there are more than 40 BGP peers the 76XX routers just don't have the CPU power to handle this BGP load. Additional to Huawei are considering other option? I'll let you know how testing goes Regards On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 6:47 AM, Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, We've been in the same situation, a small note: per slot capacity of the ASR9K is 320G it takes 40G and 100G SPAs while for NE40E-X3 is 40G, almost the same as Cisco's 7600. Regards, Waseem From: Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 9:56 AM Subject: [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K Hi We are currently looking for alternatives to upgrade cisco 76XX routers and we are comparing Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco ASR9K. I was wondering if someone can share their experience with Huawey routers as Core MPLS routers. Any advice would be greatly appreciated Thanks ___ 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/ -- Manuel Marín Transtelco Inc. 1.9152172232 ___ 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] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K
I was checking the NE40 document, quote The NE40E-X3 has three LPU slots. Each slot supports 40-Gbit/s upstream traffic and 40-Gbit/s downstream traffic. The switching capacity is 1.08Tbit/s, you can ask the marketing team to give you the product documentation, and regarding the 8x10G LPU as the document says the router doesn't support, the maximum is 4x10G XFP. regards. From: Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net To: Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com Cc: NSP cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 10:22 PM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K We are using the RSP720 and 3CXLs. Both have performance issues when dealing with multiple BGP sessions, When one of the full bgp peer flaps or when there is a link flap the other routing protocols start to flap as well. I'll try to tweak the timers in the mean time. Usually the CPU usage is around 70%. On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi Manuel, What are the supervisor engines that you are using on the 7600 routers. Regards, Waseem On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 6:47 AM, Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, We've been in the same situation, a small note: per slot capacity of the ASR9K is 320G it takes 40G and 100G SPAs while for NE40E-X3 is 40G, almost the same as Cisco's 7600. Regards, Waseem From: Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 9:56 AM Subject: [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K Hi We are currently looking for alternatives to upgrade cisco 76XX routers and we are comparing Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco ASR9K. I was wondering if someone can share their experience with Huawey routers as Core MPLS routers. Any advice would be greatly appreciated Thanks ___ 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/ -- Manuel Marín Transtelco Inc. 1.9152172232 -- Manuel Marín Transtelco Inc. 1.9152172232 ___ 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] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K
Is this a POP router? Do you have full BGP table on it? If yes, how many copies? From: Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net To: Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com Cc: NSP cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 10:22 PM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K We are using the RSP720 and 3CXLs. Both have performance issues when dealing with multiple BGP sessions, When one of the full bgp peer flaps or when there is a link flap the other routing protocols start to flap as well. I'll try to tweak the timers in the mean time. Usually the CPU usage is around 70%. On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi Manuel, What are the supervisor engines that you are using on the 7600 routers. Regards, Waseem On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 6:47 AM, Waseem waseem_alir...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, We've been in the same situation, a small note: per slot capacity of the ASR9K is 320G it takes 40G and 100G SPAs while for NE40E-X3 is 40G, almost the same as Cisco's 7600. Regards, Waseem From: Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 9:56 AM Subject: [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K Hi We are currently looking for alternatives to upgrade cisco 76XX routers and we are comparing Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco ASR9K. I was wondering if someone can share their experience with Huawey routers as Core MPLS routers. Any advice would be greatly appreciated Thanks ___ 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/ -- Manuel Marín Transtelco Inc. 1.9152172232 -- Manuel Marín Transtelco Inc. 1.9152172232 ___ 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] ESP for ASR1002
Hi, Anybody knows what the ESP cards for and does the router work without them? Regards, Waseem ___ 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] Advertise Longer prefixes
Hello, I have a scenario in which I need to advertise (in BGP) my short prefixes (/20) as longer ones (/24), is there any method to do that automatically in the IOS?? Regards, Waseem ___ 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] 6PE
Hello, I'm interested in the 6PE solution to offer IPv6 for customers, for those of you who have checked this solution in production network please share your experiences and what are the hardware and software configurations you have?? Kind regards, Waseem ___ 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] SPA-2x1GE-V2 media type
Hello, I inserted spa-2x1ge-v2 on XR device.The SPA has dual ports! How to change the media type on XR devices? Regards, Waseem ___ 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/
