ace resets
0 babbles, 0 late collision, 35665 deferred
0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers
swapped out
SPZRTR1#
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites
! ( the switch by default is auto-auto )
>
> Cumprimentos
> (Regards)
> Rui Fonseca
>
>
>
> > -Mensagem original-
> > De: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Em nome de Cisco
> > Study
> > Enviada: Sexta-feira, 4 de Agosto de 2000 5:55
input, 1236837647 bytes, 0 no
> buffer
> Received 205775 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0
> throttles
> 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0
> ignored, 0 abort
> 0 input packets with dribble condition detected
> 2503462 packets output, 859332
I have the same problem (collisions on the switch port connecting to a 10
base-t hub.) And the switch port is set on speed 10. Any idea?
Thanks
Rayza
>From: "Jim Deane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Jim Deane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECT
Umm. My understanding is that collisions are normal with a hub. The
hub itself is a single collision domain, as opposed to a switch wherein each
port is a collision domain. So, I don't think that you can get rid of
collisions in a hub environment. You could reduce them by elimin
Remove some nodes from the segment.
Hope this ain't html IAN
Duck
- Original Message -
From: Cisco Study <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 9:55 PM
Subject: collision
> Hi all,
>
> could any one tell me why collisi
...
reset the counters, and see over the next 10 to 30 minutes what happens,
(resend the show int to us).
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Deane, James [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 10:14 AM
To: 'rayza manesh'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: collision
Um
; minutes what happens,
> (resend the show int to us).
>
> Jim
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Deane, James [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 10:14 AM
> To: 'rayza manesh'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: collision
>
>
in our router to connecting to their switch and will not having
any collision. So I wonder why it is true or not? Also, why ethernet can't
connect to Cisco 2950 switch and having collision?
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=5838
Dear All,
My network have collision is this good sign?? Please help!!!
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 1 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec,
reliability 250/255, txload 5/255, rxload 9/255
Group, What is the best way to calculate collision %
on a 10BaseT ethernet port on a Catalyst 5000/5500?
Now, I have my own formula, and it is what I came up
with after looking at CCO for the way a Catalyst 5000
counts collisions. According to Cisco, it appears
that:
a single collision is only
Keep in mind that when Cisco puts 'load' on an interface, it's only refering
to transmit, not total. It seems like the versions of IOS ending in 'T'
list both 'tx load' and 'rx load' for convenience. Also, since this is
ethernet, does packets and bytes received on the interface refer to all
traf
Hi Cliff,
Fastethernet wont cure the problem, you can still run that half duplex.
What causes the collisions is running in half duplex mode. Try upping it
to full duplex. What full duplex does is it disables the internal
loopback device i.e. collision checking ussually if you are plugged into
a
Today, We are put 3660 router to their end, having Fastethernet card, and
connected to their switch.
They change their switch port as following:
interface FastEthernet0/14
load-interval 30
duplex full
so far, after observe serveral hours, there is no collision as well as not
error message in
>
>interface FastEthernet0/14
>load-interval 30
>duplex full
>
>so far, after observe serveral hours, there is no collision as well as not
>error message in our router.
>
>So, what's wrong? Is the fastethernet is better? or previous setting that I
>have is wrong?
dropped because even after 15 retries it encountered a collision.
Collisions are normal in shared (half-duplex) Ehternet, but excessive
collisions are not. Collisions are caused by the stations on the shared link
simultaneously sending. Excessive collisions are due to a shortage of
capacity. One fix
also. He
>had no choice but to upgrade the router, which he did.
>
>He was seeing lots of collisions, including excessive collisions where the
>frame got dropped because even after 15 retries it encountered a collision.
>
>Collisions are normal in shared (half-duplex) Ehternet, b
outer.
> Those routers
> >predate the full duplex standard. In fact they may predate 100
> Mbps also. He
> >had no choice but to upgrade the router, which he did.
> >
> >He was seeing lots of collisions, including excessive
> collisions where the
> >fra
thing, which
>>>
>>was 10 Mbps half
>>
>>>duplex, if you read his messages. He was using a 2500 router.
>>>
>>Those routers
>>
>>>predate the full duplex standard. In fact they may predate 100
>>>
>>Mbps also. He
>>
>
Larry Letterman wrote:
>
> Not the last word, but you imply that the collisions are only
> due to
> capacity...
> and I can have the wrong match on both ends and get plenty of
> collisions
> with no
> capacity issue.
It is a capcity issue. A collision results when
rue if the frame is 100Mb in size, but if it is a 1500 byte
frame, then surely there is no difference in the capability of a 10Mb or
100Mb Ethernet to pass the frame?
Symon
-Original Message-
From: Larry Letterman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 03 December 2002 23:02
To: [EMAIL PROTECTE
doesn't tend to
happen. The frames arrive randomly on most Ethernets. If there's more time
between frames, due to the shorter duration of transmissions, it's more
likely that two senders will be able to send when they want and without
encountering a collision. Although this isn't nec
sions. They are not a problem. The Ethernet interface
retransmits if there is a collision.
Priscilla
Steiven Poh-\(Jaring MailBox\) wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> My network have collision is this good sign?? Please help!!!
>
> FastEthernet0/48 is up, line protocol is up
>
t the half-duplex as Priscilla commented on already.
John
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Steiven Poh-(Jaring MailBox)
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Collision [7:59590]
Dear All,
My network
, 2002 8:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Collision [7:59590]
Dear All,
My network have collision is this good sign?? Please help!!!
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 1 Kbit, DLY
y are not a
> problem. The Ethernet interface retransmits if there is a
> collision.
>
> Priscilla
>
> Steiven Poh-\(Jaring MailBox\) wrote:
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> > My network have collision is this good sign?? Please
> help!!!
> >
>
Open Question
How do we detect the source of collision, i am experiencing alot of
collision on my LAN, which consisit of 10 Base T HUBS and 10/100 Switches, i
am seeing alot of collision, but i dont know where is a Source, If some one
knows how to detect the source of collsion will be great
The single collision count indicates the number of frames that were
transmitted after a single collision. The multiple collision count
indicates the number of frames that were transmitted after multiple
collisions. The late collision count indicates the number of frames that
experienced a
Hi Group Study,
I got into a discussion with a knowledgeable Sniffer instructor recently.
When he teaches cut-through-switching theory, he warns his students that a
cut-through switch does not really isolate collision domains. Consider this
example:
* The switch is receiving a frame from
Hi Group Study,
I got into a discussion with a knowledgeable Sniffer instructor recently.
When he teaches cut-through-switching theory, he warns his students that a
cut-through switch does not really isolate collision domains. Consider this
example:
* The switch is receiving a frame from
Do you have a protocol sniffer? Even etherreal may help.
""Curious"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Open Question
> How do we detect the source of collision, i am experiencing alot of
> collision on my LAN, which
Define "alot" of collisions. In a hub-based LAN, collisions are normal and
to be expected. Chances are, you're within normal range.
At 02:04 PM 7/15/2002 +, you wrote:
>Open Question
>How do we detect the source of collision, i am experiencing alot of
>co
Curious wrote:
>
> Open Question
> How do we detect the source of collision, i am experiencing
> alot of
> collision on my LAN, which consisit of 10 Base T HUBS and
> 10/100 Switches, i
> am seeing alot of collision, but i dont know where is a Source,
> If some one
&
terfaces out there that don't support it, but theoretically it is supported.
Priscilla
>
> Jaspreet
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 16 July 2002 5:25 a.m.
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
"Priscilla Oppenheimer" 7/15/02 4:02:46 PM
>>>
>Kohli, Jaspreet wrote:
>>
>> Just confirming that when we say full duplex we are referring
>> to switched networks over 100Mb. 10 Mb networks cannot run on
>> full duplex. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>
>Switched 10-Mbps Ethernet can use f
a.m.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Collision Detecting [7:48830]
Curious wrote:
>
> Open Question
> How do we detect the source of collision, i am experiencing
> alot of
> collision on my LAN, which consisit of 10 Base T HUBS and
> 10/100 Switches, i
> am seeing alo
You can run at 10/FULL//
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Penn"
To:
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 11:04 PM
Subject: RE: Collision Detecting [7:48830]
> You are wrong =) That is OLD stuff that won't do 10/full
>
> Dan
> -Original Message-
> F
OTECTED]] On Behalf Of
> Kohli, Jaspreet
> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 2:45 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Collision Detecting [7:48830]
>
> Just confirming that when we say full duplex we are referring to
> switched
> networks over 100Mb. 10 Mb networks cannot
I am just going to generalise here. Lets take just one port of a switch or
one collision domain since that's what switches do.
If we run 10 or 100 Half Duplex to a switch ... Is there a chance of a
collision occuring?
If we then run 10 or 100 Full Duplex to a switch ... Is there a chance
You are incorrect. If your explanation was correct, the premises
for 100bt hubs would not work. Ethernet hubs are shared devices and
will only function at half-duplex. 10bt and 100bt both have the collision
detction mechanism inplace, but in switches running the full duplex mode,
the detection
You should not see collisions on a full duplex link...If you do there is
probably a duplex mismatch.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 11:28 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Collision
ng when it
senses a collision. Remember in this scenario the other side is set for half
duplex.
Jeffrey Reed
Classic Networking, Inc.
Cell 717-805-5536
Office 717-737-8586
FAX 717-737-0290
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dan
Penn
Sent: Tuesda
Comments inline.
wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> If we run 10 or 100 Half Duplex to a switch ... Is there a chance of a
> collision occuring?
Yes, definitely. Anytime you run half-duplex there is a possibility of
collisions.
> If we then r
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Question:
>
> I am just going to generalise here. Lets take just one port of
> a switch or
> one collision domain since that's what switches do.
>
> If we run 10 or 100 Half Duplex to a switch ... Is there a
> chance of a
> collis
I would first like to thank everyone. I have been a
member of this groups for several years now. I have
never actually posted a question, generally I just
absorb others questions. I realise there is no
concrete answer on this, BUT how many collision on a
shared media ethernet segment does it
7;s a jam during a
collision on port 2 you know enough...
In my humble opinion you are right, but that's male intuition ;-)
Barry
Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi Group Study,
>
> I got into
The 1900 and 2820 Catalyst switches do cut-through. I did find a good white
paper at:
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/cisco/mkt/switch/cat/c1928/tech/nwgen_wp.htm
But it never comes right out and says what happens upon a collision when
forwarding. I can guess based on the architecture
Looking at this logically, I don't see how Cisco would not allow for this. A
fundamental function of a bridge (besides a layer 2 forwarding decision) is
to re-establish the slot time, thus making it a collision domain boundary.
If cut-through-switching negates extending the network diamet
bo or not, a collision or
not. Therefore if a packet is received destined for the broadcast address
and the header is in tact and looks completely correct, yet the packet is
hacked all to hell because of a collision beyond the header information,
this collision will be broadcast to all devices.
In a
y forward truly valid (tm) packets.
Sooo... cut-thru will forward runts, and you'll get
those if there's a collision after the dest addy but
within the first 64.
Frag-free will /not/ forward runts, so will protect
you from collisions that really should have happened.
It won't protect yo
collision when
} forwarding. I can guess based on the architecture, but I'm looking for some
} more definitive answers to prove my point with the other instructor. ;-)
I read the paper, and it says, "forward processing begins as soon
as the destination address is recognized". This
On Nov 9, 8:23am, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
}
} I got into a discussion with a knowledgeable Sniffer instructor recently.
} When he teaches cut-through-switching theory, he warns his students that a
} cut-through switch does not really isolate collision domains. Consider this
} example
peak load and more than one packet may be directed to the
same port at the same time."
Hope this helps.
> -Original Message-
> From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2000 3:47 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: collision on cut-
The outgoing port is to a shared Ethernet in the scenario, as stated
in the original message. A collision could certainly occur. To
understand the issue, you have to think outside the box, so to speak.
;-) Remember Ethernet says listen before you send, but two stations
listening and hearing
waits for 64bytes, then starts forwarding.
>
> Store'n'forward waits for the whole packet and CRC's it,
> so will only forward truly valid (tm) packets.
>
> Sooo... cut-thru will forward runts, and you'll get
> those if there's a collision after the dest a
at the higher rate.
Regards
Atif Awan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
ANIL.YADAV
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 9:27 AM
To: Heskett, Tony
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: collision on cut-through switch
How to avoid late collisions
A late collision usually occurs when one end of a switched ethernet link
is set to full duplex but the other end of the link is set to half-duplex.
Darren
On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, ANIL.YADAV wrote:
>
>
>
> How to avoid late collisions ?
>
> thanks
> Anil
>
>
>
, Tony; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:RE: collision on cut-through switch
A late collision usually occurs when one end of a switched ethernet link
is set to full duplex but the other end of the link is set to half-duplex.
Darren
On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, ANIL.YADAV wrote:
>
>
>
>
Not 100%, but there will be a lot of them. We had a case here where
someone connected a server set to full duplex 10Meg to a hub with a few
other PCs connected. There is connectivity, but anytime the server wanted
to transmit it would stomp any everyone else since collision detection was
hen
> memory may not serve on this one. Does that show up
> as 100% collisions?
>
> Chuck
>
>
> A late collision usually occurs when one end of a
> switched ethernet link
> is set to full duplex but the other end of the link
> is set to half-duplex.
>
> Darre
Title: RE: question : ethernet collision rule of thumb...
Yes, you will always have some collisions on a shared medium like Ethernet (obviously I'm not included a switched environment). The general guideline is that for IP you should have no more than 500 hosts on a flat network segment
Joseph wrote:
|Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 16:33:37 -0800 (PST)
|From: E Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: question : ethernet collision rule of thumb...
|
|I would first like to thank everyone. I have been a member of this
|groups for several years now. I have never ac
Title: RE: question : ethernet collision rule of thumb...
Hi ,
How can I find out the collision rate of .1% ( comparing the collisions with Output packets or bytes)
Here's the output from my ethernet interface
119069488 packets output, 3373784736 bytes, 0 underruns
31 o
Take collisions divided by packets output. You are looking for the
percentage of
collisions related to the number of packets that were sent out of that
interface.
Roman
At 05:57 AM 11/16/00 +0100, you wrote:
Hi ,
How can I find out the collision rate of .1%
( comparing the collisions
ECTED]...
| I would first like to thank everyone. I have been a
| member of this groups for several years now. I have
| never actually posted a question, generally I just
| absorb others questions. I realise there is no
| concrete answer on this, BUT how many collision on a
| shared media ethernet
It depends on what type of collisions, and whether or not your device
can report the various cases (or finding out what they are called).
Collisions aren't that horrible. They get requeued for transmission.
Deferred transmits occur when a packet is read to be transmitted but
the media is 'busy
Hi all,
How we r going to differentiate between a broadcast domain and a collision
domain.
Can we co-relate this to a router and a switch or a bridge.
-SU
___
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and
I was curious if anyone else had seen this.
We have a 2600 with 2 T1's going to other sights. The
ethernet port connects it to a Bay 450 10/100 switch.
Both switch and router ports are set to 10 / half, but
we're still seeing a collision rate of about 19% This seems
pretty high to m
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...> Hi all,
>
> How we r going to differentiate between a broadcast domain and a collision
> domain.
>
> Can we co-relate this to a router and a switch or a bridge.
>
> -SU
>
>
Collision domains:
Station A sends out a frame, this frame can collide with an other frame from
station X on the "wire". Station A and all other stations that could be
station X form a collision domain, this includes ports from routers and
switches. A collision domain means all the sta
ge
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Collision domains:
> Station A sends out a frame, this frame can collide with an other frame
from
> station X on the "wire". Station A and all other stations that could be
> station X form a collision domain, this includ
It appears that have a pretty high utilization rate on that 10MB port. It's running
close to 35% in that example, which is very high for 10Mb, half duplex. If you have a
2620 or 2621, set the ethernet port to full duplex.
Then again, now that I think about it, the collision rate, in
collision rate on 2600 ethernet port
I was curious if anyone else had seen this.
We have a 2600 with 2 T1's going to other sights. The
ethernet port connects it to a Bay 450 10/100 switch.
Both switch and router ports are set to 10 / half, but
we're st
y 16, 2000 12:53 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: High collision rate on 2600 ethernet port
>
> I was curious if anyone else had seen this.
> We have a 2600 with 2 T1's going to other sights. The
> ethernet port connects it to a Bay 450 10/100 switch.
> Both swit
/ half, but
> > we're still seeing a collision rate of about 19% This seems
> > pretty high to me. Anyone have any thoughts?
If you have a 2620, or a 26xx with a FastEthernet interface, I would create
vlans with 802.1q encapsulation on the 2600. Without a 100mb ethe
75 matches
Mail list logo
