Which model procurve? Many of them are very different.
Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>
On 10/24/2014 11:13 AM, Timothy D. McNabb via Af wrote:
This is really cool. I’m going to check into this and see what I come
up with JThanks for the input! I love what LACP does in theory, I know
in some practices it’s not optimal and not everyone’s first choice. It
is however the recommended method from DW and the only one they will
support. :-P
A couple of things that continue to interest me is that the 48 port
that is unmanageable. Assuming it is malfunctioning, by DEFAULT HP
Procurve switches have dynamic LACP across all ports, preventing
network loops automatically but also making it cumbersome to
troubleshoot this particular issue. Knowing that, and the possibility
of something running FUBAR on one of the switches, I think it’s quite
possible that the LACP that was originally configured on the
malfunctioning switch could be the culprit for the inbalance. I am
programming a 24-port Procurve that we have as a spare to handle the
trunk to test the theory.
The older Procurves have lots of options in regards to LACP (their
console is very much like a Cisco) so I may be able to setup something
similar to what you’re suggesting. I’ll update as I find out more.
Thanks for the discussion and I love the progression, getting lots of
ideas from the conversation. J
Gino, unfortunately because of the Horizon Compact I don’t believe we
have that option, at least not to get the full 800Mb/s (theoretical)
from the radios LIt’s been awhile since I went through the manual for
the setup, but I recall there were some negative aspects to linking
the radios through port 2 or something along those lines.
And for Bill, since we’re running a large bridged network currently
(but so happy we’re changing it soon!!) we’re not running any routers
at the base of our towers. I agree totally if we were segmented that
OSPF in combination with a few other protocols would handle the job
and give us some other troubleshooting capabilities not available to
us in our current config. Even packet captures would be cumbersome L
-Tim
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Mark Radabaugh
via Af
*Sent:* Friday, October 24, 2014 10:10 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Dragonwave latency issues
Tim,
Obviously you want to fix the radio issue but I can give you a little
advice on LACP.
The switch (or router) doing LACP can take various headers into
account when doing the 'hashing' to decide how to send the flows. If
LACP is what you are stuck with (Gino suggested a layer 1 method) and
you have control over the devices doing LACP take a look at the LACP
Hashing options. Typical options are MAC SRC/DST, MAC Src/Dst + L3
port, or some other options. If most of your traffic is flowing
between two interfaces (a router at each end) the MAC src/dst hashing
sends everything over one of the links. You want to find a hashing
method that has more randomness to it. In at least one case where we
use that we had to resort to not using the LACP functionality the
radio manufacturer provided and use the better LACP options in our
Juniper and Cisco switches in order to make the traffic balance on the
interfaces.
Mark
On 10/24/14, 12:38 PM, Timothy D. McNabb via Af wrote:
We have now been able to trace to the heart of the problem, though
unfortunately still attempting to determine the cause. To give you
a rough background, we have a main link that “bonds” 2 Dragonwaves
together to form one unit (using the dual radio mount). The DW
manual states for this to work when doubling the throughput, it is
required to use LACP trunking. We have this in place and it has
been working fine up until recently. The trunk is still active (no
network loop) however one radio is working more than the other,
eventually saturating one of the two links and causing the
latency. The second set of radios aren’t performing in terms of
actual traffic (signal is ok) but at most they’ve moved 200Mb/s
even though they are licensed for 400Mbs.
The link with the LACP has more or less load-balanced itself in
the past, however they are now performing very asymmetrical at
this point with over a 200Mb/s difference. I understand that LACP
does not actively load balance but that’s what has been observed
in the past. I suspect the issue is being caused by one of the
switches doing the trunking (we just discovered it is unmanageable
but still operating, again no network loop). It’s either that or
the one leg of the link itself with the low bandwidth usage is not
working properly despite indications otherwise.
We’ll investigate our theories but always looking for additional
input J
-Tim
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Josh
Reynolds via Af
*Sent:* Thursday, October 23, 2014 1:47 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Dragonwave latency issues
You can do a bit more with metro-e style NIDS... those have the
layer2 tools to do proper testing.
Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>
On 10/23/2014 12:37 PM, Eric Kuhnke via Af wrote:
it's going to be really hard to do any meaningful diagnostics
with a layer 2 switch on each end, not routers... you could
be seeing a broadcast flood of some type.
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Timothy D. McNabb via Af
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Unfortunately there is no QoS and flow control is off on the
switches L
Dragonwave was contacted as well. No determination yet though.
-Tim
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz via Af
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 22, 2014 1:36 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Dragonwave latency issues
Backpressure from the switches in terms of flow-control can
show as latency on dragonwave links.
Disable any QOS features on the dragonwave if you are using them.
Email dragonwave support
*Peter Kranz
*Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd
www.UnwiredLtd.com <http://www.unwiredltd.com/>
Desk: 510-868-1614 x100
Mobile: 510-207-0000
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Timothy
D. McNabb via Af
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 22, 2014 1:15 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Dragonwave latency issues
No routers between, just switches.
-Tim
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Paul
Conlin via Af
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 22, 2014 12:22 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Dragonwave latency issues
Could the routers at each end be the limiting factor? What is
their CPU utilization when the link is loaded? What happens
to latency if you stress the link at 200 Mbps with a speed
test? Those radios should be able to do close to 400 Mbps all
day long with no latency.
PC
Blaze Broadband
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Joshua
Heide via Af
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:06 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Dragonwave latency issues
Yes it’s a horizon compact
Bandwidth of the unit is 400mbs
Bandwidth usage between 150-200mbs during peak hours.
No QOS
Yes during non-peak hours its sits at 1ms
SNR 35.00 dB
From our prtg graphs this issues has started end of September
and latency has gotten worse during peak times as we have
deployed more 450 gear to that tower.
I currently have HAAM enabled on the link and it stays at
256qam unless we have some bad weather.
Josh Heide
Velociter Wireless
(office) 209-838-1221
(fax) 209-838-1800
www.velociter.net <http://www.velociter.net/>
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Bill
Prince via Af
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 22, 2014 11:47 AM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Dragonwave latency issues
So it's a Horizon Compact?
What is the total bandwidth, and what percentage are you
using? Have you set up any QOS? 180 ms sounds like a lot;
especially when ours are typically less than 1 ms.
-38 is right in the game. What are the other parameters
besides signal level?
bp
On 10/22/2014 11:18 AM, Joshua Heide via Af wrote:
We have a dragonwave that has latency issues that coincide
with traffic peak times. As our traffic peaks so does that
latency at 180ms. Any ideas that could cause this?
Signal is -38
Current HAAM Mode hc50_364_256qam
Thanks,
Josh Heide
Velociter Wireless
(office) 209-838-1221
(fax) 209-838-1800
www.velociter.net <http://www.velociter.net/>
--
Mark Radabaugh
Amplex
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 419.837.5015 x 1021
