There are tons of free SNMP based monitoring tools
that can do this for you. You can get these at most
free/shreware sites.
--- Larry Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Look into a PERL script called MRTG which will let
> you graph your traffic
> usage on your lease line.
>
> Srihari Babu wrote in message
>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >hi all,
> >i want to know about bandwith monitor.by
> >which i can check the bandwidth of my leased line.
> >because i am not getting sufficient bandwidth fron
> my
> >ISP>
> >i would like to know whether my ISP is not
> providiing
> >sufficient bandwidht what he promised, or there may
> be
> >a problem in our LAN.how to know the band width. is
> >there any tools to check the leased line bandwidth.
> >please help.
> >
> >thanks in advance.
> >
> >
> >SRIHARI
> >
> >--- John Neiberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> We have a 7513 as our backbone router and
> pre-12.0
> >> it was running on average at maybe 9-10% CPU.
> After
> >> upgrading to 12.1 and turning on CEF, that
> dropped
> >> to around 5%. That's really not a good test
> because
> >> we were hardly pushing the thing to begin with.
> >> Still, it does seem to make a noticable
> difference
> >> and we haven't had any problems with it.
> >>
> >> By the way, off-topic, I seem to have resolved
> the
> >> problems I had with excitemail, so I've moved
> back
> >> to using [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lately, my email
> address
> >> has been changing almost daily!
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> >
> >> > John, Bob, Raj, Phillip and the Group,
> >> >
> >> > I hadn't thought of CEF much as I "thought" it
> >> wasn't available on the
> >> > smaller routers. i.e. - only on the routers
> with
> >> line cards etc.
> >> >
> >> > However, I just enabled CEF on a 2611 and it
> >> created its table on the fly in
> >> > no time flat. The 2611 won't do dCEF however.
> >> Also, the smaller routers
> >> > can't do cef accounting.
> >> >
> >> > Anyway, now I have to mock something up in the
> lab
> >> to see if we can
> >> > determine how much of any improvement CEF will
> >> give us. Since we're not
> >> > using CEF anywhere in our network I can't just
> >> turn it on without a bit more
> >> > research.
> >> >
> >> > If it only lessens the CPU load by a few
> percent
> >> then bigger hardware is in
> >> > our future, but if we see gains of 20% or more
> >> then CEF would indeed be a
> >> > cheap solution.
> >> >
> >> > I noticed that CEF has issues with policy
> routing
> >> and other features - but
> >> > so far we're not using any of them.
> >> >
> >> > So, another question - does anyone have any
> >> idea/experience on how much CEF
> >> > will gain for us? Given the average 50% load
> on
> >> the router - practically
> >> > all switching load???
> >> >
> >> > tia
> >> >
> >> > Kevin Wigle
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "John Neiberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 4:11 PM
> >> > Subject: Re: Can someone interpret this please?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > I just checked CCO and there are so many
> >> CPU-related bugs in 12.0(5) that
> >> > I stopped counting after a while. You might
> want
> >> to upgrade, if feasible.
> >> > >
> >> > > Also, try doing a show align to see if you're
> >> getting spurious memory
> >> > access errors. One of the bugs mentioned a
> high
> >> CPU usage due to these.
> >> > >
> >> > > HTH,
> >> > > John
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Bob, Phil - and the group.....
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks for the input, gives me more to
> think
> >> about.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Some more history..........
> >> > > >
> >> > > > This router is a 3620 with OC3 and
> >> FastEthernet interfaces. It has 48
> >> > meg
> >> > > > and is running 12.0(5)XK1.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > According to Cisco's docs, the 3620 should
> be
> >> able to handle around
> >> > 20-40
> >> > > > kpps.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > However, the router shows only around 2.6
> kpps
> >> almost evenly split
> >> > in/out.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I have been unable to verify exactly on CCO
> >> but I suspect that a 3620
> >> > cannot
> >> > > > handle (very well) two high-speed
> interfaces -
> >> more specifically if one
> >> > is
> >> > > > OC3.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I have found info where Cisco, when talking
> >> about the OC3 interface for
> >> > the
> >> > > > 3600 series stated:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > "Max two high-speed network modules in a
> Cisco
> >> 3640 (includes Fast
> >> > Ethernet,
> >> > > > ATM, HSSI)"
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Now the 3640 has a 100mhz processor and the
> >> 3620 has a 80 mhz processor.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I'm wondering if the SAR process is
> >> overwhelming the 3620? I'm sure I
> >> > read
> >> > > > someplace that only one high-speed
> interface
> >> was recommended for the
> >> > 3620
> >> > > > but I haven't found that info again.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Considering the low level of traffic, what
> >> else could be keeping the cpu
> >> > > > utilization up so high? Need more
> info.....
> >> let me know!
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Kevin Wigle
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > > > From: "Phillip Heller"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > > > To: "Kevin Wigle"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > > > Cc: "cisco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > > > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 2:12 PM
> >> > > > Subject: Re: Can someone interpret this
> >> please?
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Kevin Wigle wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Dear group,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Investigating a router that is
> starting
> >> to loaded down. When I do
> >> > a
> >> > > > sh proc
> >> > > > > cpu I get 50% or cpu utilization but
> the
> >> stats don't seem to add
> >> > up to
> >> > > > 50%.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Is there another way to try and see
> >> where the 50% is coming from?
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > sh proc cpu
> >> > > > > CPU utilization for five seconds:
> >> 44%/44%; one minute: 50%; five
> >> > > > minutes:
> >> > > > > 52%
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > The five second utilization numbers in
> the
> >> above line (44%/44%)
> >> > represent
> >> > > > > two things. The first number is total
> >> processor utilization and the
> >> > > > > second is processor utilization due to
> >> interrupts. The difference in
> >> > > > > these two numbers would be the sum of
> 5sec
> >> utilization by all other
> >> > > > > processes.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > If utilization due to interrupts
> increases
> >> over time, it represents
> >> > > > > traffic growth. If it jumps alot in a
> short
> >> amount of time, it may be
> >> > a
> >> > > > > DoS attack. You can verify the latter by
> >> turning on "ip route-cache
> >> > flow"
> >> > > > > on suspected interfaces and then looking
> at
> >> the output of "sh ip cache
> >> > > > > flow".
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > If the processor gets too high with
> >> legitimate traffic, you can use
> >> > cef or
> >> > > > > dcef (ip route-cache cef, ip cef
> >> distributed).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Failing that, you'll probably more beefy
> >> hardware.
> >> > > > >
> >>
> >=== message truncated ===
> >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail -
> only $35
> >a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
> >
> >_________________________________
> >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> >Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=====
_____________________________________________
Moe Tavakoli
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
