Regarding 2501 ethernet error statistics

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by NetworkElf, May 27, 2004.

  1. NetworkElf

    NetworkElf Guest

    A network of mine consists of a 2510 router (as a default gateway) and
    a 3550 Layer3 switch connecting hosts in two VLANs. Recently, we have
    been reported by the end users that they get slow respond from the
    Telnet session. In troubleshooting the problem, I have the following
    finding:

    Ethernet0 is up, line protocol is up
    Hardware is Lance, address is 0000.0c07.ac01 (bia 0000.0c3a.8f76)
    Internet address is
    MTU 1500 bytes, BW 10000 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec, rely 255/255, load
    13/255
    Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set, keepalive set (10 sec)
    ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00
    Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never
    Last clearing of "show interface" counters 1d23h
    Queueing strategy: fifo
    Output queue 0/40, 30 drops; input queue 1/75, 0 drops
    5 minute input rate 561000 bits/sec, 139 packets/sec
    5 minute output rate 511000 bits/sec, 102 packets/sec
    7164216 packets input, 3036007075 bytes, 0 no buffer
    Received 283519 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
    20 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 20 ignored, 0 abort
    0 input packets with dribble condition detected
    6953428 packets output, 3811114393 bytes, 4 underruns
    890 output errors, 184316 collisions, 4 interface resets
    0 babbles, 0 late collision, 265160 deferred
    0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
    0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out


    As we can see there are many output errors, collisions, deferred in
    outbound traffic. I would like to know is it normal to have such
    figures for a router running ethernet (10Mb/s and half duplex)
    directly connected to 3550 layer switch? If not, what is the problem
    to contribute these figures?

    Thank you in advanced!!

    Best Regards,
    Jeff
     
    NetworkElf, May 27, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "NetworkElf" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > 6953428 packets output, 3811114393 bytes, 4 underruns
    > 890 output errors, 184316 collisions, 4 interface resets
    > 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 265160 deferred
    > 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
    > 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out
    >
    > As we can see there are many output errors, collisions, deferred in
    > outbound traffic. I would like to know is it normal to have such
    > figures for a router running ethernet (10Mb/s and half duplex)


    Is the switch forced to 10MB half depolex on that port?

    What kind of AUI transciever are you using?

    A "show controller" might be enlightening, since that will pull more details
    from the ethernet chip. I don't know if the show interface data is complete
    on a 2510 (old router!)

    Any errors reported by the 3550?
     
    Phillip Remaker, May 27, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. NetworkElf

    AnyBody43 Guest

    (NetworkElf) wrote
    > A network of mine consists of a 2510 router (as a default gateway) and
    > a 3550 Layer3 switch connecting hosts in two VLANs. Recently, we have
    > been reported by the end users that they get slow respond from the
    > Telnet session. In troubleshooting the problem, I have the following
    > finding:


    > MTU 1500 bytes, BW 10000 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec, rely 255/255, load
    > 13/255
    > Last clearing of "show interface" counters 1d23h
    > Output queue 0/40, 30 drops; input queue 1/75, 0 drops
    > 5 minute input rate 561000 bits/sec, 139 packets/sec
    > 5 minute output rate 511000 bits/sec, 102 packets/sec
    > 7164216 packets input, 3036007075 bytes, 0 no buffer
    > Received 283519 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
    > 20 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 20 ignored, 0 abort
    > 0 input packets with dribble condition detected
    > 6953428 packets output, 3811114393 bytes, 4 underruns
    > 890 output errors, 184316 collisions, 4 interface resets
    > 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 265160 deferred


    > As we can see there are many output errors, collisions, deferred in
    > outbound traffic. I would like to know is it normal to have such
    > figures for a router running ethernet (10Mb/s and half duplex)
    > directly connected to 3550 layer switch? If not, what is the problem
    > to contribute these figures?


    The network she is full Captain!

    There are no indications that there is anything *wrong*. However,

    The "20 Ignored" are I think an indication that the router has
    either run out of buffers or is too busy.

    2/69 collisions is OK. Deferred just means that the line was
    busy the *instant* the router tried to transmit and is normal.

    "890 output errors" not otherwise accounted for?

    Hmmmm! don't know what this is at all.

    Check the buffers and CPU.

    A 2500 is a REALLY old slow box. You don't say what you are doing
    with it but it is designed to connect an ethernet to a wan link.
    In a modern network with all of those windows boxes blasting out
    broadcasts and stuff it could easily be overwhelmed.

    The wires look OK.
     
    AnyBody43, May 27, 2004
    #3
  4. NetworkElf

    News Account Guest

    Change your switch port from auto to force 10Mb/s and half duplex to match
    the router.

    Don Woodward


    "NetworkElf" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > A network of mine consists of a 2510 router (as a default gateway) and
    > a 3550 Layer3 switch connecting hosts in two VLANs. Recently, we have
    > been reported by the end users that they get slow respond from the
    > Telnet session. In troubleshooting the problem, I have the following
    > finding:
    >
    > Ethernet0 is up, line protocol is up
    > Hardware is Lance, address is 0000.0c07.ac01 (bia 0000.0c3a.8f76)
    > Internet address is
    > MTU 1500 bytes, BW 10000 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec, rely 255/255, load
    > 13/255
    > Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set, keepalive set (10 sec)
    > ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00
    > Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never
    > Last clearing of "show interface" counters 1d23h
    > Queueing strategy: fifo
    > Output queue 0/40, 30 drops; input queue 1/75, 0 drops
    > 5 minute input rate 561000 bits/sec, 139 packets/sec
    > 5 minute output rate 511000 bits/sec, 102 packets/sec
    > 7164216 packets input, 3036007075 bytes, 0 no buffer
    > Received 283519 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
    > 20 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 20 ignored, 0 abort
    > 0 input packets with dribble condition detected
    > 6953428 packets output, 3811114393 bytes, 4 underruns
    > 890 output errors, 184316 collisions, 4 interface resets
    > 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 265160 deferred
    > 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
    > 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out
    >
    >
    > As we can see there are many output errors, collisions, deferred in
    > outbound traffic. I would like to know is it normal to have such
    > figures for a router running ethernet (10Mb/s and half duplex)
    > directly connected to 3550 layer switch? If not, what is the problem
    > to contribute these figures?
    >
    > Thank you in advanced!!
    >
    > Best Regards,
    > Jeff
     
    News Account, May 27, 2004
    #4
  5. NetworkElf

    Hansang Bae Guest

    > > Last clearing of "show interface" counters 1d23h
    > > Output queue 0/40, 30 drops; input queue 1/75, 0 drops
    > > 5 minute input rate 561000 bits/sec, 139 packets/sec
    > > 5 minute output rate 511000 bits/sec, 102 packets/sec
    > > 7164216 packets input, 3036007075 bytes, 0 no buffer
    > > Received 283519 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
    > > 20 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 20 ignored, 0 abort
    > > 0 input packets with dribble condition detected
    > > 6953428 packets output, 3811114393 bytes, 4 underruns
    > > 890 output errors, 184316 collisions, 4 interface resets
    > > 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 265160 deferred




    890 errors in 2 days? That's too many.

    --

    hsb

    "Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
    *************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
    ********************************************************************
    Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
    reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
    ********************************************************************
     
    Hansang Bae, May 28, 2004
    #5
  6. In article <>,
    Hansang Bae <> wrote:
    :890 errors in 2 days? That's too many.

    After a recent [experimental] network reconfiguration, we are getting
    over 50000 errors per day on one of the ethernet ports.

    Unfortunately, our network monitoring software isn't even noticing --
    it's doing something strange like taking the error packet count as a
    percentage of the bandwidth and deciding the ratio is too low to
    be important :(

    I'm grumbling to the manufacturer of the network monitoring software!

    (Unfortunately I have no solid clues yet as to why the high number
    of errors. The error rate correlates with the length of the cable
    runs, but the cable runs are all well within spec -- and they didn't
    give errors when plugged into a different switch.)
    --
    Studies show that the average reader ignores 106% of all statistics
    they see in .signatures.
     
    Walter Roberson, May 28, 2004
    #6
  7. In article <c96884$k3$>,
    Walter Roberson <-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote:
    :After a recent [experimental] network reconfiguration, we are getting
    :eek:ver 50000 errors per day on one of the ethernet ports.

    I seem to have tracked this down. I had forced the ports to 100/Full
    (which I knew to be what they were running at.) As soon as I changed
    the ports to autonegotiate, they autonegotiated 100/Full (exactly
    the same state) -- and the errors stopped.

    I'm still somewhat puzzled by this, I do admit.
    --
    IMT made the sky
    Fall.
     
    Walter Roberson, May 28, 2004
    #7
  8. NetworkElf

    AnyBody43 Guest

    "News Account" <> wrote
    > Change your switch port from auto to force 10Mb/s and half duplex to match
    > the router.


    > "NetworkElf" <> wrote


    > > Ethernet0 is up, line protocol is up
    > > Hardware is Lance, address is 0000.0c07.ac01 (bia 0000.0c3a.8f76)
    > > Internet address is
    > > MTU 1500 bytes, BW 10000 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec, rely 255/255, load
    > > 13/255
    > > Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set, keepalive set (10 sec)
    > > ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00
    > > Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never
    > > Last clearing of "show interface" counters 1d23h
    > > Queueing strategy: fifo
    > > Output queue 0/40, 30 drops; input queue 1/75, 0 drops
    > > 5 minute input rate 561000 bits/sec, 139 packets/sec
    > > 5 minute output rate 511000 bits/sec, 102 packets/sec
    > > 7164216 packets input, 3036007075 bytes, 0 no buffer
    > > Received 283519 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
    > > 20 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 20 ignored, 0 abort
    > > 0 input packets with dribble condition detected
    > > 6953428 packets output, 3811114393 bytes, 4 underruns
    > > 890 output errors, 184316 collisions, 4 interface resets
    > > 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 265160 deferred
    > > 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
    > > 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out


    Top poster wrote;
    > Change your switch port from auto to force 10Mb/s and half duplex to match
    > the router.


    There is no evidence whatsoever of a duplex missmatch and even if
    there was one it is clearly not affecting performance.
    I can say that since there are no CRC errors, frame errors, or
    late collisions. These are the only problems that a duplex missmatch
    can cause.

    If there was a speed missmatch the port would not come up at all.

    Does anyone know where what errors could account for the missing
    output errors.

    The summary says: 890 output errors; Output queue 0/40, 30 drops;.

    What are the other 860 output errors?
     
    AnyBody43, May 28, 2004
    #8
  9. NetworkElf

    Hansang Bae Guest

    In article <c96j55$eu8$>, -
    cnrc.gc.ca says...
    > I seem to have tracked this down. I had forced the ports to 100/Full
    > (which I knew to be what they were running at.) As soon as I changed
    > the ports to autonegotiate, they autonegotiated 100/Full (exactly
    > the same state) -- and the errors stopped.
    > I'm still somewhat puzzled by this, I do admit.


    Makes perfect sense. The server was set to auto. Your switch was hard
    coded to 100/FD. Since it was hard coded, it never sent the link pulse
    required for AN. Since the server did not see the AN pulse, it
    defaulted to 100/HD!

    When you set your port to AN, both saw the pulse and negotiated to
    100/FD.


    --

    hsb

    "Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
    *************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
    ********************************************************************
    Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
    reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
    ********************************************************************
     
    Hansang Bae, May 29, 2004
    #9
  10. NetworkElf

    Tax Johnson Guest

    "Walter Roberson" <-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote in message
    news:c96j55$eu8$...
    > In article <c96884$k3$>,
    > Walter Roberson <-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote:
    > :After a recent [experimental] network reconfiguration, we are getting
    > :eek:ver 50000 errors per day on one of the ethernet ports.
    >
    > I seem to have tracked this down. I had forced the ports to 100/Full
    > (which I knew to be what they were running at.) As soon as I changed
    > the ports to autonegotiate, they autonegotiated 100/Full (exactly
    > the same state) -- and the errors stopped.
    >
    > I'm still somewhat puzzled by this, I do admit.


    If setting up your switchport to auto caused it to negotiate to 100/full --
    that means the far-end is setup to auto-negotiate, right? But when you had
    your switch-port hard-coded to 100/full, the far-end auto-negotiated to
    100/half and your switchport probably noticed a boatload of input errors.
     
    Tax Johnson, May 29, 2004
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Vin
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,364
    Aaron Leonard
    Nov 18, 2003
  2. Peter
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,061
  3. Wajdi  Georges
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    889
    Johnny Routin
    Jun 2, 2004
  4. JXM2119
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,555
    Doug McIntyre
    Mar 11, 2005
  5. andyr
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,051
Loading...

Share This Page