Hi all, few days ago I was confused when Cacti showed me low traffic
values (5-10Kbps) on VLAN interface, outbound counter values showed me
the same result. But when i check out current traffic on a end-mile
switch I see right values (1Gbps).
5 min googling my issue told me IOS 12.2 has some
On 22/May/15 22:18, CiscoNSP List wrote:
Definitely...somehow, a ton a prefixes got leaked into IGP some time
ago...potentially a fat finger on a redist...anyway, all those
prefixes were removed from RIB, and the ME should have done
appropriate house cleaning and removed them from
Interesting - based on your explanations on this thread, I had a strange
feeling that the box was running out of labels to assign to prefixes
because, well, there were either too many prefixes to assign labels to, or
too few labels to assign to prefixes.
Correct - but the bigger issue is,
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark
Tinka
Sent: den 22 maj 2015 04:51
To: CiscoNSP List; alum...@gmail.com; Phil Mayers
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] New IOS release time frame, when bug is identified
On
Anyone ever received the error % The DHCP database could not be locked. Please
retry the command later. It pops up when doing any sort of show dhcp command.
I can find reference to it as a bug for 7206, but can't seem to find anything
for 3850.
I am running 3.03.05SE. Figured I would try this
On 22/May/15 08:42, Oleksii Zolotarov wrote:
Hi all, few days ago I was confused when Cacti showed me low traffic
values (5-10Kbps) on VLAN interface, outbound counter values showed me
the same result. But when i check out current traffic on a end-mile
switch I see right values (1Gbps).
5
On 22/May/15 17:40, Daniel Dib wrote:
The networks I've been involved with only assign labels to loopbacks.
Wouldn't it be a huge waste to assign labels to all IGP prefixes? They're
not your next-hops (hopefully).
One would think so - but that's how Cisco do it by default.
Anyway, I
If you only use links and loopbacks in your network the table should be pretty
small.
Eliminating links is necessary once you get to a certain size but we are in 30
something locations in numerous states and two countries
and we haven't had to remove links yet. BGP links to eBGP sessions should
Correct, they will wrap when you have moved more than about 4 billion bytes
(2^32) in a single 5 minute polling cycle. That works out to just over
114.5Mb/s
It's usually easiest these days to just use 64 bit counters for everything,
but with anything over essentially a 100M interface it's
My mistake. I full own I was off by an order of magnitude due to not
working on it in a long time. It is indeed a bit over 100m or so, not
1g
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Bill Wichers bi...@waveform.net wrote:
Correct, they will wrap when you have moved more than about 4 billion bytes
On 22/May/15 18:47, Mack McBride wrote:
If you only use links and loopbacks in your network the table should be
pretty small.
Eliminating links is necessary once you get to a certain size but we are in
30 something locations in numerous states and two countries
and we haven't had to
Are you sure this isn't a counter wrap issue? Are you using the 64 bit
counters or the default 32 bit in cacti? The wrap line is right
around 1gig is why i ask.
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
On 22/May/15 08:42, Oleksii Zolotarov wrote:
Hi all, few
On 22/May/15 20:28, Blake Dunlap wrote:
Are you sure this isn't a counter wrap issue? Are you using the 64 bit
counters or the default 32 bit in cacti? The wrap line is right
around 1gig is why i ask.
I've generally found 32-bit counters to wrap around 120Mbps.
Mark.
13 matches
Mail list logo
