Re: Catalyst 6500 High Switch Proc

From: Philip L. (no email)
Date: Mon Nov 17 2008 - 21:34:28 EST

  • Next message: Robin Rodriguez: "Re: Clueful FIDO contacts"

    Ross Vandegrift wrote:
    > On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 04:35:28PM -0500, Philip L. wrote:
    >> One thing to note, is that our main ACL for ingress traffic is applied
    >> here due to historical reasons. It's roughly 5000 single host entries
    >> at present. We also use these devices for NDE.
    > On a SUP7203BXL, if your ACL TCAM utilization is fine, this shouldn't
    > impact performance unless you're logging too much. Since you've been
    > over the CPU utilization doc, I'm guessing you know that.
    > "show platform hardware capacity acl" will give you a breakdown on
    > your ACL TCAM usage.
    >> I'm probably missing some other key details, but what could influence
    >> the SP like this? Any insight would be appreciated.
    > Cisco says that Netflow-based features always handle the first packet
    > of a flow in software, but I don't know if this is the RP or the SP.
    > It would make sense if a first-flow packet that didn't need punting
    > hit the SP and not the RP. In that case, your traffic level with
    > netflow enabled could explain your high SP utilization.
    It is a Sup720-3BXL. Based on the suggestions here, I went ahead and
    did 'no ip flow ingress' on all the interfaces just to see, and surely
    enough, the SP went down to about 10-15%. My colleague implemented
    packet count-based NetFlow sampling to attempt to reduce the 100%
    NetFlow TCAM usage, and it appears to be partially effective. It still
    fills up frequently, so we'll have to do some more tweaking.

    I appreciate all the replies, public and private.

    Philip L.

  • Next message: Robin Rodriguez: "Re: Clueful FIDO contacts"

    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs

    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD