On 31/05/16 17:51, Peter Kranz wrote:
I cannot for the life of me figure out why this box seems to think it has TCAM issues.. It's a SUP-2T XL platform.. Usage levels look well under TCAM limits.
I *think* sup2T is the same as sup720, in that a TCAM exception is a permanent error condition once it's occurred; so the triggering incident could be some way in the past now; have a look at the logs for the date (and start graphing these numbers - they're available over SNMP)
One place we've seen this happen without it being routing-related is a sudden explosion of IPv6 neighbours (IPv4 adjacencies would do it too) as they're /128 or /32 entries in TCAM.
Do you have large layer2 attached to the box that could conceivably have done this?
_______________________________________________ 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/
