Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > > Steiven Poh-\(Jaring MailBox\) wrote: > > > > Hi Group, > > > > This port is connected to my 2600 router, can anyone comment > > whether the > > bandwidth is healthy? Thanks > > Bandwidth just means capacity. It can't be healthy or not > healthy, although the amount of bandwith could be inappropriate > for the applications, either more than is needed or not enough. > Your bandwidth is 10,000,000 bits per second. (See "BW 10000 > Kbit" in the output). You are using 10 Mbps Ethernet. It > appears that the hardware supports Fast Ethernet (100 Mbps) but > you aren't using it. Perhaps you don't need it. > > Is your concern bandwidth UTILIZATION? > > You don't seem to have a problem with bandwidth utilization, as > shown by the txload being 1/255 and the rxload being 2/255. > Cisco expresses bandwidth utilizaton (also known as load) as a > fraction of 255 where 255 represents the capacity. > > What you should be looking at is reliability. Cisco is saying > that the reliability is 255/255, in other words "perfect," but > we don't know how long this switch has been running. Cisco uses > a rolling exponential average so perhaps everything was fine > for a while but there have also been some problems at some > point, as indicated by the statistics lower down in the output. > So, don't just look at the reliabilty statistic. Look farther > down. These statistics are cause for concern: > > 4440080 runts. These are frames that arrived that are too > short. They are usually an indication that the sender > encountered a collision. It tried to send, noticed the > collision, and backed off, leaving behind a runt. You have > received 76531109 packets. About 5 percent were runts. That's > high. > > Notice that the switch port is having a hard time sending also. > The 513798 deferred represents the number of times the switch > port tried to send but couldn't because the medium was busy. On > shared Ethernet, this will happen, but that seems like rather > often in your case. > > Also, in a number of cases the switch did acquire the medium, > but encountered a collision nonetheless. See the 1999663 > collisions. This is normal on a very busy Ethernet, but seems > high for this network. > > The router has output 139742667 packet successfully. So its > collision rate is about 1 percent, which is somewhat high.
I meant to say the "switch has output...." I criticized Cisco's output interpreter for saying router when it meant switch, but I did the same thing. Argh. ;-) By the way, please let us know if our advice improves matters, i.e. our advice to go with full duplex instead of half. Thanks, Priscilla > > Anyway, is this a point-to-point link between the switch and > the router? Why don't you set it to full duplex? That way they > each have a dedciated transmit path and they don't have to > worry about sensing the carrier to see if someone else is > sending (there isn't anyone else) and they shouldn't encounter > collisions. > > Set both sides to full duplex, and traffic will have fewer > problems. > > There is also a somewhat high rate of output buffer failures > and underrruns, indicating that this switch is not keeping up > with traffic. Is it a low-end switch? > > First solve the main problem (by using full duplex) and then > keep an eye on the buffer failures and underruns. If > performance improves, which it probably will, perhaps you can > ignore the buffer failures and underruns for now, but > definitely keep an eye on them. You may need a faster switch or > to tune the switch with TAC's help. > > HTH > > _______________________________ > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > www.troubleshootingnetworks.com > www.priscilla.com > > > > > > > > > FastEthernet0/48 is up, line protocol is up > > Hardware is Fast Ethernet, address is 000a.f477.662c (bia > > 000a.f477.662c) > > MTU 1500 bytes, BW 10000 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec, > > reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 2/255 > > Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set > > Keepalive set (10 sec) > > Half-duplex, 10Mb/s > > input flow-control is off, output flow-control is off > > ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00 > > Last input 00:00:06, output 00:00:00, output hang never > > Last clearing of "show interface" counters never > > Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output > > drops: 0 > > Queueing strategy: fifo > > Output queue :0/40 (size/max) > > 5 minute input rate 82000 bits/sec, 19 packets/sec > > 5 minute output rate 52000 bits/sec, 55 packets/sec > > 76531109 packets input, 2985431130 bytes, 0 no buffer > > Received 4019174 broadcasts, 4440080 runts, 0 giants, 0 > > throttles > > 4440080 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 > ignored > > 0 watchdog, 986257 multicast, 0 pause input > > 0 input packets with dribble condition detected > > 139742667 packets output, 3729299934 bytes, 2417684 > > underruns > > 0 output errors, 1999663 collisions, 1 interface resets > > 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 513798 deferred > > 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier, 0 PAUSE output > > 2417684 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped > out > > > > > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62608&t=62567 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
