If in doubt run show system processes summary to check for busy process
during your peak time.
Also you can have some interesting stats with a show pfe statistics traffic
Christian
Le 04/07/2011 15:33, Matthias Brumm a écrit :
Hello!
At the moment I am monitoring it with top on UNIX shell, do you have
another suggestion? In top this process is idleing.
Regards,
Matthias
2011/7/4 Christian <cdebalo...@neotelecoms.com
<mailto:cdebalo...@neotelecoms.com>>
Hi,
Try to monitor the fwdd process - when running high it causes
packet to drop on these pc's.
Christian
Le 04/07/2011 13:11, Adam Leff a écrit :
I realize this will sound silly, but have you checked for
half-duplex
on your interfaces?
Those onboard J6350 interfaces are actually 10/100/1000, so if you
don't have the speed and link-mode hardcoded, do a show
interfaces
extensive ge-0/0/# and check the link partner section to
ensure you're
running full-duplex.
Adam
On Jul 4, 2011, at 7:01, Matthias Brumm<matth...@brumm.net
<mailto:matth...@brumm.net>> wrote:
Hello!
Since some weeks now, we have a strange packet loss on one
of our edge
locations.
A few days ago an IX informed us about packet loss on our
router. The router
in place is a J6350. We have a 1 Gig line to us and two 1
Gig lines to some
uplinks. Every communication goes through a 1 Gig copper
link to a ProCurve
2810-24G. So the external links are connected to the
switch and the switch
via one cable with the router.
The packet loss is strange, because:
1. In smokeping during the busy hours of the day, there
are losses of about
5%
2. From my workstation I get packet loss of about 10 up to 50%
3. There are no errors on the switch or router interface
(except i.e. VLAN
errors)
4. no customers have reported any problems. But there are
many customers
relying on real time communication (VoIP/RDP)
5. The switch port with the router is showing maximum 200 Mbit
6. The router is showing 20% real-time threads
According to the datasheet the J-Series should be able to
deliver this
performance easily. Or are the onboard Gig-Interfaces the
problem? Of course
I know, that this physical configuration is a bad idea,
and I will change is
very soon to ease the load on this particular port.
Any other ideas?
Regards,
Matthias
______________________________ _________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/ mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
<https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp>
______________________________ _________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/ mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
<https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp>
______________________________ _________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/ mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
<https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
