Every character that is processed by an AUX port creates an interrupt,
so the AUX port hits the CPU harder than any other port running at the
same speed.  CPU utilization at 35% shouldn't be enough to cause the
problem you're seeing.

One thing you'd want to make sure of is that you are not trying to use a
baud rate higher than 9600, and that you have set flow control to none,
stop bits to 1, and configured 'no exec' on the aux port.  Similar
settings should be configured on the console port at the other end,
though it does of course need 'exec'.  Make sure that none of the router
lines include the command "logging synchronous."

Console ports run at 9600 baud by default because they have no flow
control lines.  Higher speeds cannot be guaranteed to work reliably,
though they often do.

It's always possible that you've run into a bug.  My personal favorites
for IOS version are 12.1(15) if you can run it, 12.0(22) or 11.3(11c) if
memory isn't sufficient.

Recommended config:

2514 aux port:
!
line aux 0
 speed 9600
 flowcontrol none
 stopbits 1
 no exec
!

25xx router:
!
line con 0
 speed 9600
 flowcontrol none
 stopbits 1
 exec
!
config-register 0x2102
!

Thanks,
Shawn

Michael Gunnels wrote:
> 
> I've been having a strange problem.  When reverse
> telnetting from my 2514's AUX port to my 25xx's
> console port (I've tried multiple routers).  I am
> sometimes losing packets during show commands.  The
> router that initiates the reverse telnet cpu is at
> most 35%.  I've tried using variations of flow control
> on both routers, but it doesn't seem to make much
> difference.  Has anyone else experienced this?  It's
> driving me nuts!  It skips and jumbles things
> together.  It only shows up when reverse telnetting.
> If I'm consoled in or regular telnet ting their is no
> problem.  Please help.




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45761&t=45729
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to