Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Cisco > Giant packets on a 10Gig interface

Reply
Thread Tools

Giant packets on a 10Gig interface

 
 
DC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2008
Hi,

I have two Cisco 6509 chassis running IOS version 12.2(17a)SX1 each with
a Sup 720 and a 4 port 10-Gigabit Ethernet module:

6500-1#show mod
Mod Ports Card Type Model
--- ----- -------------------------------------- ------------------
1 16 SFM-capable 16 port 1000mb GBIC WS-X6516-GBIC
2 4 CEF720 4 port 10-Gigabit Ethernet WS-X6704-10GE
3 48 SFM-capable 48-port 10/100 Mbps RJ45 WS-X6548-RJ-45
5 2 Supervisor Engine 720 (Active) WS-SUP720-BASE
6 16 SFM-capable 16 port 10/100/1000mb RJ45 WS-X6516-GE-TX

Mod Hw Fw Sw
--- ------ ------------ ------------
1 2.0 6.1(3) 8.2(0.56)TET
2 1.3 12.2(14r)S5 12.2(17a)SX1
3 1.1 6.3(1) 8.2(0.56)TET
5 3.1 7.7(1) 12.2(17a)SX1
6 2.6 6.3(1) 8.2(0.56)TET

Mod Sub-Module Model Serial Hw
--- --------------------------- ------------------ ------------ -------
2 Centralized Forwarding Card WS-F6700-CFC SAD074701VB 1.2
5 Policy Feature Card 3 WS-F6K-PFC3A SAD08030CFA 2.1
5 MSFC3 Daughterboard WS-SUP720 SAD08030C29 2.1

6500-1#show run int t2/1
Building configuration...

Current configuration : 226 bytes
!
interface TenGigabitEthernet2/1
description Link to other office
no ip address
udld port aggressive
mls qos trust dscp
switchport
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode trunk
switchport nonegotiate
end

They are connected to each other using a TenGigabit Ethernet port over
single mode dark fibre. The fibre run is a couple of miles long and
supplied by a local telco. Only one of the 10Gb interfaces is being used
on each switch.

The 10Gb interfaces on each end of this link are reporting a large
number of giants when I do a show int (when I looked the other day it
appeared to be around 150Mb/sec, right now, late on a Saturday night
it's around 4Mb/sec). They are the only interfaces that are reporting
giants.

If I look at the interfaces with SNMP I see no errors or discards.

6500-1#show int t2/1
TenGigabitEthernet2/1 is up, line protocol is up (connected)
Hardware is C6k 10000Mb 802.3, address is xxxx.xxxx.xxxx (bia
xxxx.xxxx.xxxx)
Description: Link to other office
MTU 1500 bytes, BW 10000000 Kbit, DLY 10 usec,
reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255
Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set
Full-duplex, 10Gb/s
input flow-control is off, output flow-control is on
ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00
Last input 00:00:41, output 00:00:57, output hang never
Last clearing of "show interface" counters never
Input queue: 0/2000/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0
Queueing strategy: fifo
Output queue: 0/40 (size/max)
5 minute input rate 154000 bits/sec, 122 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 770000 bits/sec, 492 packets/sec
16609486843 packets input, 7935718529298 bytes, 0 no buffer
Received 175730057 broadcasts, 0 runts, 3545951873 giants, 0 throttles
0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
0 input packets with dribble condition detected
22436196006 packets output, 17205205668690 bytes, 0 underruns
0 output errors, 0 collisions, 2 interface resets
0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred
0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out

So, are these giants anything to be concerned about or are they just a
red herring and any idea why I only see them on the ten Gigabyte interfaces?
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Doan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2008
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008, DC wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have two Cisco 6509 chassis running IOS version 12.2(17a)SX1 each with
> a Sup 720 and a 4 port 10-Gigabit Ethernet module:
>
> 6500-1#show mod
> Mod Ports Card Type Model
> --- ----- -------------------------------------- ------------------
> 1 16 SFM-capable 16 port 1000mb GBIC WS-X6516-GBIC
> 2 4 CEF720 4 port 10-Gigabit Ethernet WS-X6704-10GE
> 3 48 SFM-capable 48-port 10/100 Mbps RJ45 WS-X6548-RJ-45
> 5 2 Supervisor Engine 720 (Active) WS-SUP720-BASE
> 6 16 SFM-capable 16 port 10/100/1000mb RJ45 WS-X6516-GE-TX
>
> Mod Hw Fw Sw
> --- ------ ------------ ------------
> 1 2.0 6.1(3) 8.2(0.56)TET
> 2 1.3 12.2(14r)S5 12.2(17a)SX1
> 3 1.1 6.3(1) 8.2(0.56)TET
> 5 3.1 7.7(1) 12.2(17a)SX1
> 6 2.6 6.3(1) 8.2(0.56)TET
>
> Mod Sub-Module Model Serial Hw
> --- --------------------------- ------------------ ------------ -------
> 2 Centralized Forwarding Card WS-F6700-CFC SAD074701VB 1.2
> 5 Policy Feature Card 3 WS-F6K-PFC3A SAD08030CFA 2.1
> 5 MSFC3 Daughterboard WS-SUP720 SAD08030C29 2.1
>
> 6500-1#show run int t2/1
> Building configuration...
>
> Current configuration : 226 bytes
> !
> interface TenGigabitEthernet2/1
> description Link to other office
> no ip address
> udld port aggressive
> mls qos trust dscp
> switchport
> switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
> switchport mode trunk
> switchport nonegotiate
> end
>
> They are connected to each other using a TenGigabit Ethernet port over
> single mode dark fibre. The fibre run is a couple of miles long and
> supplied by a local telco. Only one of the 10Gb interfaces is being used
> on each switch.
>
> The 10Gb interfaces on each end of this link are reporting a large
> number of giants when I do a show int (when I looked the other day it
> appeared to be around 150Mb/sec, right now, late on a Saturday night
> it's around 4Mb/sec). They are the only interfaces that are reporting
> giants.
>
> If I look at the interfaces with SNMP I see no errors or discards.
>
> 6500-1#show int t2/1
> TenGigabitEthernet2/1 is up, line protocol is up (connected)
> Hardware is C6k 10000Mb 802.3, address is xxxx.xxxx.xxxx (bia
> xxxx.xxxx.xxxx)
> Description: Link to other office
> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 10000000 Kbit, DLY 10 usec,
> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255
> Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set
> Full-duplex, 10Gb/s
> input flow-control is off, output flow-control is on
> ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00
> Last input 00:00:41, output 00:00:57, output hang never
> Last clearing of "show interface" counters never
> Input queue: 0/2000/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0
> Queueing strategy: fifo
> Output queue: 0/40 (size/max)
> 5 minute input rate 154000 bits/sec, 122 packets/sec
> 5 minute output rate 770000 bits/sec, 492 packets/sec
> 16609486843 packets input, 7935718529298 bytes, 0 no buffer
> Received 175730057 broadcasts, 0 runts, 3545951873 giants, 0 throttles
> 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
> 0 input packets with dribble condition detected
> 22436196006 packets output, 17205205668690 bytes, 0 underruns
> 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 2 interface resets
> 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred
> 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
> 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out
>
> So, are these giants anything to be concerned about or are they just a
> red herring and any idea why I only see them on the ten Gigabyte interfaces?
>

Giants are frames that are larger the the MTU configured on the interface.
In this case, your MTU is 1500 and you are doing dot1q Vlan tagging which
added a 4-byte tag to each frame and make it larger than the MTU
configured. Your switches are forwarding these frames and just report
them as giants (not dropped) so I wouldn't worry too much. You can change
the MTU size on the interfaces to a larger size if you wish.

Doan

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
DC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-19-2008
Doan said the following on 16/03/2008 12:14 AM:
> Giants are frames that are larger the the MTU configured on the interface.
> In this case, your MTU is 1500 and you are doing dot1q Vlan tagging which
> added a 4-byte tag to each frame and make it larger than the MTU
> configured. Your switches are forwarding these frames and just report
> them as giants (not dropped) so I wouldn't worry too much. You can change
> the MTU size on the interfaces to a larger size if you wish.


Thanks for responding. What you're saying does make sense.

One of my 6509 switches has access ports (for servers) and trunk ports.
So, if 1500 byte frames are coming from a server then that would explain
the giants on one of the 6509 switches.

However, all the ports on the other switch (with the exception of one
port going to a voice gateway) are trunked. Yet the only ports on either
switch reporting giants are the two 10Gb ports connecting to the two
switches.

If the giants are a result of the dot1q tag shouldn't I be seeing it on
the other trunked ports?

BTW, http://www.timhogan.net/Troubleshoot...itch-Ports.htm suggest
that giants might be because of a bad NIC:

"Frames received that exceed the maximum IEEE 802.3 frame size (1518
bytes for non-jumbo Ethernet) and have a bad Frame Check Sequence (FCS)."

Anyway, I tried setting the MTU for the two interfaces to 9216 but I'm
still getting giants
 
Reply With Quote
 
Doan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-19-2008
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008, DC wrote:

> Doan said the following on 16/03/2008 12:14 AM:
> > Giants are frames that are larger the the MTU configured on the interface.
> > In this case, your MTU is 1500 and you are doing dot1q Vlan tagging which
> > added a 4-byte tag to each frame and make it larger than the MTU
> > configured. Your switches are forwarding these frames and just report
> > them as giants (not dropped) so I wouldn't worry too much. You can change
> > the MTU size on the interfaces to a larger size if you wish.

>
> Thanks for responding. What you're saying does make sense.
>
> One of my 6509 switches has access ports (for servers) and trunk ports.
> So, if 1500 byte frames are coming from a server then that would explain
> the giants on one of the 6509 switches.
>
> However, all the ports on the other switch (with the exception of one
> port going to a voice gateway) are trunked. Yet the only ports on either
> switch reporting giants are the two 10Gb ports connecting to the two
> switches.
>
> If the giants are a result of the dot1q tag shouldn't I be seeing it on
> the other trunked ports?
>
> BTW, http://www.timhogan.net/Troubleshoot...itch-Ports.htm suggest
> that giants might be because of a bad NIC:
>
> "Frames received that exceed the maximum IEEE 802.3 frame size (1518
> bytes for non-jumbo Ethernet) and have a bad Frame Check Sequence (FCS)."
>
> Anyway, I tried setting the MTU for the two interfaces to 9216 but I'm
> still getting giants
>


I think you have found the problem. Searching cisco.com, I've found the
same thing:

"Jumbo frames are not defined as part of the IEEE Ethernet standard and
are vendor-dependent. They can be defined as any frame bigger than the
standard ethernet frame of 1518 bytes (which includes the L2 header and
Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC)). Jumbos have larger frame sizes, typically
> 9000 bytes.


Giant frames are defined as any frame over the maximum size of an ethernet
frame (larger than 1518 bytes) that has a bad FCS.

Baby Giant frames are just slightly larger than the maximum size of an
ethernet frame. Typically this means frames up to 1600 bytes in size."

I think you should put in a sniffer and find the bad NIC.

Doan



 
Reply With Quote
 
DC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-01-2008
DC said the following on 15/03/2008 11:08 PM:
> Hi,
>
> I have two Cisco 6509 chassis running IOS version 12.2(17a)SX1 each with
> a Sup 720 and a 4 port 10-Gigabit Ethernet module:


<snip>

Regarding the above problem with giants being reported on a
WS-X6704-10GE module on a Cat6500 running Version 12.2(17a)SX1. I found
the following Cisco bug report:

CSCef87392 Bug Details
Giants incorrectly counted on trunk with 67xx modules
A Catalyst 6500 may increment giants on 67xx cards for ports that are
trunking.
This does not affect the performance of the switch, and is purely cosmetic.

Workaround:

None

12.2(17a)SX1 isn't listed as one of the known affected versions,
however, a number of 12.2(1 releases are. So, I'm assuming that the
above bug applies to my switch as well and that it's nothing to worry about.
 
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
Discrepancy between flow-packets and interface counter Garry Glendown Cisco 9 04-20-2005 08:38 PM
cannot get an older 10gig maxtor disk to boot du ah A+ Certification 2 02-01-2005 11:25 PM
Telecoms 10gig cap and speed limiting Jed Meisterdude NZ Computing 6 10-12-2004 10:39 AM
Eigrp Hello packets and ATM interface Jeff R Cisco 1 12-31-2003 04:26 PM
Cisco IOS Interface Blocked by IPv4 Packets upgrade problem John Cisco 3 07-25-2003 03:38 PM



Advertisments