Problems with port Sharings X670

  • 0
  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 3 years ago
  • Solved
Hello,

There`s something odd happenings here, and more than that was the solution of it.

We`ve a sharing with a Juniper MX80, and there`re two 10G ports connect on, the 47 and 48 (Extreme).
After issuing the command:

configure sharing 47 add ports 45,46

The hashings seens to not work properly.
The traffic droped significantly, the two added ports (45,46) seems to be more affected than the 47,48.

Then comes the odd  "solution", after disabling the sharing and adding again with the master becoming port 45, the problem was solved.


It`s a problem to be checked, because it`s the second time that I`m having the same problem.
I`m using the version 15.6.3.1 v1563b1-patch1-5.
X670.
Photo of Julian Eble

Julian Eble

  • 1,394 Points 1k badge 2x thumb

Posted 3 years ago

  • 0
  • 1
Photo of Jarek

Jarek

  • 2,398 Points 2k badge 2x thumb
Hi,

you mean traffic from X670 to MX80  OR from MX80 to X670 ?
What hash algo. do you use ?

--
Jarek
Photo of Julian Eble

Julian Eble

  • 1,394 Points 1k badge 2x thumb
Hello Jarek,
We tried for 5 minutes, we couldn`t perform more than that.
I observe after adding the two ports to the LAG.
Photo of Jarek

Jarek

  • 2,398 Points 2k badge 2x thumb
You  send ping to Juniper interface ?
If yes, have you try to ping something that is after the Juniper  ?
Maybe cpu on Juniper is busy...

If I understand correctly, you have two port in LAG 47 and 48. 47 is master port.
When you add 45 and 46 to this LAG, you see problems with traffic.
Do you change the hash algorithm ?
Do you use L3_L4 hash or custom hash ?I ask because bellow you have pasted show's with two of them.

--
Jarek
Photo of Julian Eble

Julian Eble

  • 1,394 Points 1k badge 2x thumb
Hello Jarek,
Yes, we sent the ping to directly to customers.
No High cpu was found on Juniper.

Thats right, when add the ports 45 and 46 I see the packet loss.
Yes I tried all of them, even fixed and customs.
Photo of Jarek

Jarek

  • 2,398 Points 2k badge 2x thumb
Any info in logs on X670 ?
Did you check congestion counter on ports?
What shows: debug hal show congestion (hit a few times)

Did you check CPU utilization on X670 after you add a port to the LAG?

--
Jarek
(Edited)
Photo of Julian Eble

Julian Eble

  • 1,394 Points 1k badge 2x thumb
No infos.
Yes, I did check that, but nothing incremented.
I don`t have the problem now, because after re-creating the lag it stoped.
No, I haven`t see CPU usage.
Photo of Patrick Voss

Patrick Voss, Alum

  • 11,714 Points 10k badge 2x thumb
Can you send the "show sharing" output and explain how you are determining the traffic is being affected?
Photo of Julian Eble

Julian Eble

  • 1,394 Points 1k badge 2x thumb
Load Sharing Monitor
Config    Current    Agg       Ld Share    Ld Share  Agg   Link    Link Up
Master    Master     Control   Algorithm   Group     Mbr   State   Transitions
==============================================================================
     8      8        LACP      L3_L4       8          Y      A        3
                               L3_L4       9          Y      A        3
    27     27        LACP      L3_L4       27         Y      A        1
                               L3_L4       28         Y      A        1
    29     29        LACP      L3_L4       29         Y      A        1
                               L3_L4       30         Y      A        1
                               L3_L4       31         Y      A        1
    47     45        LACP      L3_L4       45         Y      A        1
                               L3_L4       46         -      R        0
                               L3_L4       47         Y      A        2
                               L3_L4       48         Y      A        2
==============================================================================

Below I enabled just one port to see if the problems happens.
After that the traffic became this:

Port     Link    Link   Rx             Peak Rx       Tx            Peak Tx         State   Speed  % bandwidth    % bandwidth   % bandwidth   % bandwidth
================================================================================
45        A       10000     1.59          2.96          0.99            1.09
46        R       0         0.00          0.00          0.00            0.00
47        A       10000    26.33         38.23         34.27           50.37
48        A       10000    24.27         40.51         43.32           63.29

Port 45 has a much less traffic then the others ports.
We have about 5 lacp on this switch with the Juniper, none had this kind of problem.

The only behaviour was about using predecessors ports of the master sharing port.
As I said before, after disabling/enabling the sharing and set the port 45 as Master the traffic became ok.


Here's the output now:

X670 # sh sharingLoad Sharing Monitor
Config    Current    Agg       Ld Share    Ld Share  Agg   Link    Link Up
Master    Master     Control   Algorithm   Group     Mbr   State   Transitions
==============================================================================
     8      8        LACP      L3_L4       8          Y      A        4
                               L3_L4       9          Y      A        3
    27     27        LACP      L3_L4       27         Y      A        1
                               L3_L4       28         Y      A        1
    29     29        LACP      L3_L4       29         Y      A        1
                               L3_L4       30         Y      A        1
                               L3_L4       31         Y      A        1
    45     45        LACP      custom      45         Y      A        2
                               custom      46         Y      A        2
                               custom      47         Y      A        2
                               custom      48         Y      A        2
==============================================================================
Link State: A-Active, D-Disabled, R-Ready, NP-Port not present, L-Loopback
Load Sharing Algorithm: (L2) Layer 2 address based, (L3) Layer 3 address based
                        (L3_L4) Layer 3 address and Layer 4 port based
                        (custom) User-selected address-based configuration
Custom Algorithm Configuration: ipv4 L3-and-L4, crc-32 upper
Number of load sharing trunks: 4


X670 # sh ports 45-48 utilization bandwidth
Port     Link    Link   Rx             Peak Rx       Tx            Peak Tx
         State   Speed  % bandwidth    % bandwidth   % bandwidth   % bandwidth
================================================================================
45        A       10000    15.95         15.95         44.13           44.13
46        A       10000    15.75         15.75         38.12           38.12
47        A       10000    15.87         38.23          4.10           51.62
48        A       10000    15.99         40.51          5.93           63.29
================================================================================
          > indicates Port Display Name truncated past 8 characters
          Link State: A-Active, R-Ready, NP-Port Not Present, L-Loopback
(Edited)
Photo of Brandon Clay

Brandon Clay, Escalation Support Engineer

  • 13,606 Points 10k badge 2x thumb
Based on this, it looks like what Jarek said is probably what happened. When the sharing was disabled on the X670, the LACP would drop causing the ports to be removed from the LAG on the MX80 as well.

When it came back up, the existing flows from the MX80 were re-hashed including the new ports.

-Brandon
Photo of Julian Eble

Julian Eble

  • 1,394 Points 1k badge 2x thumb
I agree with that, but why when I do the same thing with other switchs this problem doesn`t occur?
I mean, the thing is the master port number, if you add some ports that`s not the sequential the same behavior appears.
I tested that with another switch and another MX, the MX had other firmware.
But I had the same symptoms