On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, The Long and Winding Road wrote: |->> They have told us to config our ethernet port to half duplex so packets |->> will be retransmitted if they get lost in their ATM cloud so we have a |->> fairly high collison rate on this port. I dont know enough about ATM to |->> say if this is good or bad...? |-> |-> |->CL: huh? the retransmission is determined from and between the source and |->destination hosts, not by routers along the way. this half duplex |->instruction doesn't make sense to me.
Nor does it to me either but before we put in the 7206, we had their 7204 as the gateway connected to a switch and it was set half-duplex even before I started here. I'm going to dig more into this. The part of this that annoys me is when I asked my boss about this he said the provider would charge us an xtra $2k/month to run the port full-duplex....telus is hurting and are trying to squeeze as much as they can from us and everyone else. |->CL: have you considered doing traffic studies to determine if any qos type |->services could be of benefit? anything like traffic shaping, random early |->detect, things like that? We have started doing that because we started noticing that outbound traffic higher than inbound. About 6 weeks ago we moved the routers to a switch as a start just to look at sniffing the traffic via port spanning. 4pm in the afternoon we started and within an hour, we found that 50-60% of traffic outbound was riding on port 1214 (Kazaa etc) At that time outbound traffic was pushing 18Megs, inbound was about 15Megs. Historically traffic was 8-10Megs out and 15-18Megs in. P2P is killing us. A few simple ACL's have been put to rate-limit outgoing traffic on that port for P2P, which has helped. And we are looking at packet shaping possiblities. My boss wants a Packeteer....but I'd like to see if I can do something with the router instead of spending 20 grand. |->CL: according to the following link, up to 400,000 pps |-> |->http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/rt/7200/prodlit/c7200_ds.htm |-> |->your description doesn't indicate you have oversubscribed the back plane. |-> Yea I dont think we are either now that Ive seen some numbers. I was looking for specs on the NSE1 not the 7206. Thanks for the link. |->> Anyway to acutally tell for certain if the router is dropping packets? |-> |->show buffers |->show queueing |->show queue interface etc. Showing misses/failures on all buffers but these have the most: Small buffers, 104 bytes (total 50, permanent 50, peak 201 @ 7w0d): 44 in free list (20 min, 150 max allowed) 1991931468 hits, 98395 misses, 43142 trims, 43142 created 2371 failures (0 no memory) Middle buffers, 600 bytes (total 25, permanent 25, peak 92 @ 3d20h): 23 in free list (10 min, 150 max allowed) 43042905 hits, 2828 misses, 2508 trims, 2508 created 703 failures (0 no memory) Big buffers, 1524 bytes (total 50, permanent 50, peak 68 @ 6d12h): 50 in free list (5 min, 150 max allowed) 12398616 hits, 359 misses, 81 trims, 81 created 79 failures (0 no memory) so according to docs on CCO about buffers, misses/failures usually lead to dropped packets. This leads me to believe that data is coming in at a rate higher than the RP can keep up though. Will have to look at upping the # of permenant buffers and see if that helps. Thanks, Keith Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=57950&t=57922 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
