Somebody knows if this occurs in other MX routers ? This trouble with flow and traffic….
Rodrigo Augusto Gestor de T.I. Grupo Connectoway http://www.connectoway.com.br <http://www.connectoway.com.br/> http://www.1telecom.com.br <http://www.1telecom.com.br/> * rodr...@connectoway.com.br ( (81) 3497-6060 ( (81) 98184-3646 ( INOC-DBA 52965*100 On 23/03/17 09:43, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Rodrigo Augusto" <juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net on behalf of rodr...@1telecom.com.br> wrote: >Javier, I have the same issue on the mx104�. Increase the latency when >traffic of one AE interface is near from 40GB( 40GB tx and 28rx), and I >have others peers on this mx�. When traffic goes down this latency is low >again�.. When I see this e-mail deactivate the sampling on interfaces and >goes to make a tests again today� > >Rodrigo Augusto >Gestor de T.I. Grupo Connectoway >http://www.connectoway.com.br <http://www.connectoway.com.br/> >http://www.1telecom.com.br <http://www.1telecom.com.br/> >* rodr...@connectoway.com.br >( (81) 3497-6060 >( (81) 98184-3646 >( INOC-DBA 52965*100 > > > > >On 22/03/17 22:31, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Javier Rodriguez" ><juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net on behalf of >rodriguezsot...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>As Nitzan suggested, I deactivated the inline jflow and the traffic has >>increased. >>Now I ask, what is the real forwarding capacity of this box? 40G in + 40G >>out? (now it didn't reach 40G in total) >> >>Javier. >> >>2017-03-20 12:15 GMT-03:00 Javier Rodriguez <rodriguezsot...@gmail.com>: >> >>> Nitzan, thank you very much, I'll keep that in mind. >>> Anyway I can not understand how the router "eats" the packets without >>> being counted ....That gives me panic! >>> I can't find discarded packets anywhere! >>> >>> JR. >>> >>> 2017-03-20 2:31 GMT-03:00 Nitzan Tzelniker >>><nitzan.tzelni...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> We saw a limitation around 40Gbps when running MX80 with RE based >>>>jflow >>>> (inline works good ) we didnt got good explanation why it limit the >>>>traffic >>>> so try to disable some features and see if it help >>>> >>>> Nitzan >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Javier Rodriguez < >>>> rodriguezsot...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mmm no, I think it doesn't work on MX80 / MX104. >>>>> >>>>> JR. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2017-03-19 23:14 GMT-03:00 Olivier Benghozi >>>>><olivier.bengh...@wifirst.fr >>>>> >: >>>>> >>>>> > What about bypass-queuing-chip on MIC interfaces ? Would it work on >>>>> > MX80/104 ? >>>>> > >>>>> > > On 20 march 2017 at 01:32, Saku Ytti <s...@ytti.fi> wrote : >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Ok that's only 31Gbps total, without having any actual data, my >>>>>best >>>>> > > guess is that you're running through QX. Only quick reason I can >>>>>come >>>>> > > up for HW to limit on so modest traffic levels. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > On 20 March 2017 at 02:25, Javier Rodriguez < >>>>> rodriguezsot...@gmail.com> >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> > >> Soku, >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> Maybe there was a misunderstanding , the inbound traffic on >>>>>fpc2's >>>>> LAG >>>>> > was >>>>> > >> 4Gbps , and the outbound traffic was 27Gbps aprox. That outbound >>>>> traffic >>>>> > >> enters by the fpc1 and fpc0. >>>>> > >> It's IMIX traffic, the average packet size is 1250Bytes (out) >>>>> 200Bytes >>>>> > (in). >>>>> > >> I tried to see dropped packets with "show precl-eng 5 statistics >>>>>" >>>>> and >>>>> > "show >>>>> > >> mqchip 0 drop stats" at pfe shell but it's 0. Does it save >>>>> historical >>>>> > data? >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> <--27G-- | | <--27G-- >>>>> > >> |FPC2 FPC 0/1 | >>>>> > >> --4G--> | | --4G--> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> Regards, >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> Javier. >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> 2017-03-19 20:43 GMT-03:00 Saku Ytti <s...@ytti.fi>: >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> Hey, >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> There aren't multiple FPCs on the box really, there is only >>>>>single >>>>> MQ >>>>> > >>> chip out of where all ports sit, usually MIC ports behind >>>>> additional >>>>> > >>> IX chip, which is not congested. It's architecturally single >>>>> linecard >>>>> > >>> fabricless box. >>>>> > >>> You're saying you're pushing on the 4x10GE fixed ports >>>>>31+31Gbps, >>>>> e.g. >>>>> > >>> 62Gbps? It might be possible on (perhaps artificially) >>>>>unfortunate >>>>> > >>> cell alignment that it could be congested on so low values. Are >>>>>all >>>>> > >>> the packets same size, i.e is this lab scenario or just IMIX >>>>> traffic? >>>>> > >>> MQ pfe exceptions and MQ=>LU counters might be interesting to >>>>>see. >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> If you use QX chip, 62Gbps would be really good, QX chip is not >>>>> > >>> dimensioned for line rate _unidir_ (i.e. can't do even 40Gbps). >>>>>If >>>>> you >>>>> > >>> don't know if you're using QX or not, just deactive whole >>>>> > >>> class-of-service and scheduer config in interfaces. >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> On 20 March 2017 at 01:26, Javier Rodriguez < >>>>> rodriguezsot...@gmail.com >>>>> > > >>>>> > >>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>> Hi, >>>>> > >>>> >>>>> > >>>> Thanks for your reply Saku. >>>>> > >>>> The problem is that fpc2 (fixed ports) can't overcome 31Gbps >>>>>(in + >>>>> > out) >>>>> > >>>> with 6Mpps. The graph shows a straight line as if it were >>>>>being >>>>> > limited. >>>>> > >>>> I have moved some interfaces from LAG to fpc1 and fpc0 and the >>>>> traffic >>>>> > >>>> has >>>>> > >>>> incresed. (It only has a tunnel-service in fpc0 of 1g) >>>>> > >>>> It's as if it were being limited by the MQ, but I do not see >>>>> discarded >>>>> > >>>> packages, or I do not know where to look at them. >>>>> > >>>> >>>>> > >>>> JR. >>>>> > >>>> >>>>> > >>>> 2017-03-19 6:53 GMT-03:00 Saku Ytti <y...@ntt.net>: >>>>> > >>>> >>>>> > >>>>> Hey Javier, >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> MX104 and MX80 (1st gen Trio MQ/LU) should do about 55Mpps >>>>>and >>>>> 75Gbps >>>>> > >>>>> (in+out). >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> On 19 March 2017 at 09:12, Javier Rodriguez < >>>>> > rodriguezsot...@gmail.com> >>>>> > >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>> > >>>>>> I need a bit of your knowledge. >>>>> > >>>>>> I have a MX104 as PE router with 4 LAGs. >>>>> > >>>>>> One LAG facing to P router on FPC2 (fixed ports). The other >>>>>LAGs >>>>> > >>>>>> distributed in FPC0 and FPC1. >>>>> > >>>>>> The problem is that traffic is being limited when reach 28G >>>>> out/ 4G >>>>> > >>>>>> in >>>>> > >>>>>> (31Gbps total). >>>>> > >>>>>> I changed one interface (10G) of the LAG (to P router) to >>>>>FPC1 >>>>> and >>>>> > >>>>>> the >>>>> > >>>>>> traffic has grown a little more. >>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>> > >>>>>> Where is the limitation? In the MQ chip? >>>>> > >>>>>> Where can I see those discarded packages? >>>>> > >>>>>> How much traffic will the router support on FPC2? >>>>> > >>>>>> Where could I get a graphic of its internal architecture? >>>>> > >>>>>> Does a MX80 have the same behavior? >>>>> > >>>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>>> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >>>>> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Atte. >>>>> >>>>> Javier I. Rodríguez Sotelo >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Atte. >>> >>> Javier I. Rodríguez Sotelo >>> >>> >> >> >>-- >>Atte. >> >>Javier I. Rodríguez Sotelo >>_______________________________________________ >>juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >>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
_______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp