Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Cisco > what are "runts" packets ?

Reply
Thread Tools

what are "runts" packets ?

 
 
PJML
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
someone wrote:
> hello everybody,
>
> I have a problem with a port on a cisco 2950 switch :
>
> 38062 packets input, 6125735 bytes
> Received 26 broadcasts, 3412 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
> 3503 input errors, 56 CRC, 35 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
> 0 watchdog, 0 multicast
>
>
> I don't know what "runts" packets are, can somebody help me ?
>
> thanks in advance.


They're basically packets which arrived incomplete for
some reason - usually they are too-short.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mabrouk@belateche
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
a packet smaller than 64 bytes, is considered as a runt packet and is
ignored as too small.

"someone" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bf6dj4$o53$(E-Mail Removed)...
> hello everybody,
>
> I have a problem with a port on a cisco 2950 switch :
>
> 38062 packets input, 6125735 bytes
> Received 26 broadcasts, 3412 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
> 3503 input errors, 56 CRC, 35 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
> 0 watchdog, 0 multicast
>
>
> I don't know what "runts" packets are, can somebody help me ?
>
> thanks in advance.
>
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
someone
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
hello everybody,

I have a problem with a port on a cisco 2950 switch :

38062 packets input, 6125735 bytes
Received 26 broadcasts, 3412 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
3503 input errors, 56 CRC, 35 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
0 watchdog, 0 multicast


I don't know what "runts" packets are, can somebody help me ?

thanks in advance.



 
Reply With Quote
 
John Agosta
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
I think that's "less than 64 bits"




"Walter Roberson" <(E-Mail Removed)-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote in message
news:bf6gs7$rlf$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <3f16bfa6$(E-Mail Removed)>, PJML <(E-Mail Removed)>

wrote:
> :someone wrote:
> :> I don't know what "runts" packets are, can somebody help me ?
>
> :They're basically packets which arrived incomplete for
> :some reason - usually they are too-short.
>
> runts are always (not just 'usually') too short. In ethernet, < 512 bits.
> In ethernet if they make it to 512 bits then if they are not well-formed
> they start counting as FCS Align errors (if it's not a multiple
> of 8 bits) or FCS Errors (if it is a multiple of 8 bits.)
>
> In -some- contexts, 'runts' can include the partial packets that are
> formed when a transmission is abandoned because a collision is
> detected. My belief is that IOS's "show interface" runt count does NOT
> [normally] include those partial packets. If you see a noticable
> number of runts, you -probably- have a network problem; my first
> guess would be that there is a failing NIC involved.
> --
> Strange but true: there are entire WWW pages devoted to listing
> programs designed to obfuscate HTML.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Rich Blum
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
"someone" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<bf6dj4$o53$(E-Mail Removed)>...
> hello everybody,
>
> I have a problem with a port on a cisco 2950 switch :
>
> 38062 packets input, 6125735 bytes
> Received 26 broadcasts, 3412 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
> 3503 input errors, 56 CRC, 35 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
> 0 watchdog, 0 multicast
>
>
> I don't know what "runts" packets are, can somebody help me ?
>

Runt packets are packets that are less than the minimum packet
size (64 bytes for Ethernet). They often occur due to collisions on
the line. On switches the cause is usually a mis-matched duplex
problem (full on one end and half on the other) caused by bad
autodetection of a device. Try "hard coding" the duplex to either full
or half on one or both ends and see if the problem goes away. We have
had lots of issues with bad NIC cards and/or drivers that cause this.
Sometimes upgrading the NIC driver helps. Hope this helps solve your
problem.

Rich Blum - Author
"Network Performance Open Source Toolkit" (Wiley)
http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyT...471433012.html
 
Reply With Quote
 
liminas_LTU
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
"someone" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<bf6dj4$o53$(E-Mail Removed)>...
> hello everybody,
>
> I have a problem with a port on a cisco 2950 switch :
>
> 38062 packets input, 6125735 bytes
> Received 26 broadcasts, 3412 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
> 3503 input errors, 56 CRC, 35 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
> 0 watchdog, 0 multicast
>
>
> I don't know what "runts" packets are, can somebody help me ?
>
> thanks in advance.


Looks like you need to check cables (CRC, Frame, input indicates);
test it by Fluke2000, Agilent WireScope, ... to certify network
cabling. Cable become Cat5e only after certification, it's not enough
to only to by cables and parts that have Cat5e stamp.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Steve
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
"Runts" are packets smaller than 64k.

"someone" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<bf6dj4$o53$(E-Mail Removed)>...
> hello everybody,
>
> I have a problem with a port on a cisco 2950 switch :
>
> 38062 packets input, 6125735 bytes
> Received 26 broadcasts, 3412 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
> 3503 input errors, 56 CRC, 35 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
> 0 watchdog, 0 multicast
>
>
> I don't know what "runts" packets are, can somebody help me ?
>
> thanks in advance.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Walter Roberson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
Steve <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
:"Runts" are packets smaller than 64k.

Not unless the missing unit afterwards is the "microbyte".
--
Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million
typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare. -- Blair Houghton.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dave Pooser
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, John Agosta
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > runts are always (not just 'usually') too short. In ethernet, < 512 bits.


> I think that's "less than 64 bits"


Nope, it's <64 bytes, which is the same thing as 512 bits. <64 bits
ouldn't even include source and destination MAC addresses. That
wouldn't be a runt, that would be a munchkin.

--
Bubba Dave Pooser

A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in
human history with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael T. Hall
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-17-2003
Wouldn't that be "millibyte?"

* I couldn't resist *

- Michael


"Walter Roberson" <(E-Mail Removed)-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote in message
news:bf7278$5vv$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
> Steve <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> :"Runts" are packets smaller than 64k.
>
> Not unless the missing unit afterwards is the "microbyte".
> --
> Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million
> typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare. -- Blair

Houghton.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dropped/slow packets - VERY odd Justin Rich Wireless Networking 1 05-05-2005 10:14 PM
No packets exchanged and cannot repair IP/DHCP address BTInternet Wireless Networking 1 12-14-2004 05:25 PM
Wireless Network Connected but no packets exchanged!! BTInternet Wireless Networking 1 12-13-2004 08:35 PM
Internet Packets Sent but not received =?Utf-8?B?TmF2eVdpZmV5MjAwNA==?= Wireless Networking 2 11-22-2004 06:37 PM
copy packets David Hill Cisco 6 07-22-2003 03:16 PM



Advertisments