|
List Info
Thread: Strange Packet Loss Problem
|
|
| Strange Packet Loss Problem |
|
2006-10-23 12:51:53 |
Here are some rapids with error statistics
ckoch core2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 56 data bytes
!!!!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.840/0.895/1.098/0.102 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 56 data bytes
!!!!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.835/0.892/1.101/0.104 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 100
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 100 data bytes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0% packet
loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.856/0.870/1.072/0.022 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 200
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 200 data bytes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0% packet
loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.907/1.509/34.638/3.605 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 293
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 293 data bytes
!.!!!!!..!.!....!.!!!!!..!.!!.!!......!!!..!..!!!.!.!....!..
!!!!!!!!....!.!..!!..!!!!!.!.!!!..!!!.!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 55 packets received, 45% packet
loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.016/1.251/9.847/1.172 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 292
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 292 data bytes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0% packet
loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.990/1.008/1.273/0.032 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 294
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 294 data bytes
!!...!!!.!!..!!.....!.!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!.!..!!.!.!..!!!!!!!!.!
.!!!.!...!!!!!!.....!..!!!.!.!.!..!.!.!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 59 packets received, 41% packet
loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.013/1.525/22.546/2.798 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 300
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 300 data bytes
!!.!!!!!!!!..!.!!!.!!!.!!.!!.!.!!.!.!!.!..!.!!!!.!!.!...!!.!
.!!.!.!.!!.!!!!!...!!..!..!!.....!!!!!..
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 60 packets received, 40% packet
loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.018/1.303/9.984/1.269 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 400
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 400 data bytes
.!!.!!..!.!!.!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!..!!.!!..!!..!.!!.!!!.!..!..
!!!.!!.!!!.!!!!.!.!..!!!!!.!!!.!!!!!!.!.
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 68 packets received, 32% packet
loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.068/1.484/21.258/2.440 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 700
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 700 data bytes
!..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 96 packets received, 4% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.260/1.333/5.439/0.432 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 800
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 800 data bytes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!.!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 97 packets received, 3% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.321/1.345/1.636/0.046 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 1000
PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 1000 data bytes
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0% packet
loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.449/1.498/3.275/0.208 ms
ckochcore2.lhr3> show system statistics icmp
icmp:
0 drops due to rate limit
3747729 calls to icmp_error
0 errors not generated because old message was icmp
Output histogram:
echo reply: 9220490
destination unreachable: 3745301
time exceeded: 1577
time stamp reply: 472
2 messages with bad code fields
0 messages less than the minimum length
338 messages with bad checksum
2 messages with bad source address
28 messages with bad length
15 echo drops with broadcast or multicast destinaton
address
0 timestamp drops with broadcast or multicast
destination address
Input histogram:
echo reply: 51106
destination unreachable: 5631
source quench: 6
routing redirect: 829
#7: 2
echo: 9220505
time exceeded: 1883
parameter problem: 1
time stamp: 472
time stamp reply: 1
information request reply: 20
address mask reply: 2
9220962 message responses generated
cckochcore2.lhr3> show pfe statistics ip icmp
ICMP Statistics:
135715 requests
507 network unreachables
96036 ttl expired
0 ttl captured
0 redirects
0 mtu exceeded
0 icmp/option handoffs
ICMP Errors:
0 unknown unreachables
0 unsupported ICMP type
0 unprocessed redirects
0 invalid ICMP type
0 invalid protocol
0 bad input interface
38913 throttled icmps
0 runts
ICMP Discards:
0 multicasts
0 bad source addresses
0 bad dest addresses
32 IP fragments
85 ICMP errors
ckochcore2.lhr3>
-----Original Message-----
From: Josef Buchsteiner [mailto:josefbjuniper.net]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:45 AM
To: Christian Koch
Cc: juniper-nsppuck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Strange Packet Loss Problem
I see... lets then go back to the rapid pings and see
where
the icmp bad checksum counter is increasing and do then
local
loop actions...
thanks
Josef
Monday, October 23, 2006, 2:38:21 PM, you wrote:
CK>
CK>
CK> Hey Josef,
CK>
CK> Real quick, here is a regular ping which looks
fine, and a
CK> snapshot of system icmp stats
CK>
CK> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping 212.71.229.25 PING
212.71.229.25
CK> (212.71.229.25): 56 data bytes
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=0 ttl=251
time=1.113 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=1 ttl=251
time=1.063 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=2 ttl=251
time=0.957 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=3 ttl=251
time=0.995 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=4 ttl=251
time=0.947 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=5 ttl=251
time=1.429 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=6 ttl=251
time=0.934 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=7 ttl=251
time=1.017 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=8 ttl=251
time=0.935 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=9 ttl=251
time=0.973 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=10 ttl=251
time=1.138 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=11 ttl=251
time=1.003 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=12 ttl=251
time=0.946 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=13 ttl=251
time=1.172 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=14 ttl=251
time=1.002 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=15 ttl=251
time=1.009 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=16 ttl=251
time=0.921 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=17 ttl=251
time=1.009 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=18 ttl=251
time=0.959 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=19 ttl=251
time=0.973 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=20 ttl=251
time=2.362 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=21 ttl=251
time=1.034 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=22 ttl=251
time=1.007 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=23 ttl=251
time=0.913 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=24 ttl=251
time=0.959 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=25 ttl=251
time=1.021 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=26 ttl=251
time=0.996 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=27 ttl=251
time=0.966 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=28 ttl=251
time=3.044 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=29 ttl=251
time=0.940 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=30 ttl=251
time=0.946 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=31 ttl=251
time=1.054 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=32 ttl=251
time=0.989 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=33 ttl=251
time=0.973 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=34 ttl=251
time=0.963 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=35 ttl=251
time=1.028 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=36 ttl=251
time=0.954 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=37 ttl=251
time=0.965 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=38 ttl=251
time=0.999 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=39 ttl=251
time=1.003 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=40 ttl=251
time=0.897 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=41 ttl=251
time=1.126 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=42 ttl=251
time=0.913 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=43 ttl=251
time=1.058 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=44 ttl=251
time=0.942 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=45 ttl=251
time=1.030 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=46 ttl=251
time=0.941 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=47 ttl=251
time=1.047 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=48 ttl=251
time=0.938 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=49 ttl=251
time=0.954 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=50 ttl=251
time=0.964 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=51 ttl=251
time=0.976 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=52 ttl=251
time=0.944 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=53 ttl=251
time=1.006 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=54 ttl=251
time=0.972 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=55 ttl=251
time=1.585 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=56 ttl=251
time=0.990 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=57 ttl=251
time=11.160 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=58 ttl=251
time=0.948 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=59 ttl=251
time=21.018 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=60 ttl=251
time=0.996 ms
CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=61 ttl=251
time=30.768 ms ^C
CK> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
CK> 62 packets transmitted, 62 packets received, 0%
packet loss
CK> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
0.897/2.029/30.768/4.634 ms
CK>
CK> ckochcore2.lhr3> show system statistics icmp
CK> icmp:
CK> 0 drops due to rate limit
CK> 3747728 calls to icmp_error
CK> 0 errors not generated because old message
was icmp
CK> Output histogram:
CK> echo reply: 9220380
CK> destination unreachable: 3745300
CK> time exceeded: 1577
CK> time stamp reply: 472
CK> 2 messages with bad code fields
CK> 0 messages less than the minimum length
CK> 338 messages with bad checksum
CK> 2 messages with bad source address
CK> 28 messages with bad length
CK> 15 echo drops with broadcast or multicast
destinaton
CK> address
CK> 0 timestamp drops with broadcast or
multicast destination
CK> address
CK> Input histogram:
CK> echo reply: 50251
CK> destination unreachable: 5631
CK> source quench: 6
CK> routing redirect: 829
CK> #7: 2
CK> echo: 9220395
CK> time exceeded: 1883
CK> parameter problem: 1
CK> time stamp: 472
CK> time stamp reply: 1
CK> information request reply: 20
CK> address mask reply: 2
CK> 9220852 message responses generated
CK>
CK> -----Original Message-----
CK> From: Josef Buchsteiner [mailto:josefbjuniper.net]
CK> Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 9:27 AM
CK> To: Christian Koch
CK> Cc: juniper-nsppuck.nether.net
CK> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Strange Packet Loss Problem
CK>
CK> Christian,
CK>
CK> if it is a data corruption on certain bit
patterns then
CK> you should see this problem also without
rapid pings.
CK> In order to find out where this
happen I would
CK> certainly perform a regular ping ( you
may need more
CK> packets ) and watch the icmp statistics to
confirm that
CK> it is data corruption in case you
get icmp chksum
CK> errors. "show system statistics
icmp"
CK>
CK> To find out if this is local or remote (
you could make
CK> some statements with the icmp
statistics already
CK> however I prefer solid results)and you
need to put this
CK> sonet link into local loop and
encapsulation cisco-hdlc
CK> with no-keepalive. Then you perform the
ping again with
CK> bypass routing and interface knob to
make sure the
CK> traffic goes out and comes back in and
you watch the
CK> packet result and icmp statistics.
This way you will
CK> find out if this is local M40 or remote
M40.
CK>
CK> Once you know this it becomes kinda
bit tricky. It
CK> could be the FPC in question that is
the trigger but
CK> also other FPCs are contributing in
the shared data
CK> buffer which means you would need to
turn off one by
CK> one and see if the error stops. If you
are left with
CK> the OC-48 then I would suggest to
replace this
CK> particular FPC. To sanity check also other
links of the
CK> router if possible.
CK>
CK> Check also the message log if you
ever have seen
CK> anytime ECC error reported. Just one of
them is already
CK> enough to give you some hints as you
would not need to
CK> do above isolation work
CK>
CK> hope this helps
CK> Josef
CK>
CK> PS: yes I do have seen such
symptoms in the past
CK> and not only on one vendor.
CK>
CK>
CK>
CK> Friday, October 20, 2006, 8:36:09 PM, you wrote:
CK>
CK>>
CK>>
CK>> Hi All,
CK>>
CK>> I am experiencing a strange issue between 2 m40
core routers CK>> connect through an oc48 link
CK>> CK>> I experience packet loss only when
sending packets between 293 and CK>> 599 bytes.
CK>>
CK>> I am also speaking to cold telecom about the
issue to see if it's a
CK>
CK>> problem with the sonet link, but as of now the
link is not taking CK>> any errors or alarms.
CK>>
CK>> Anyone seen anything strange like this before?
CK>>
CK>> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25
count 10000 size 300 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25
(212.71.229.25): 300 data bytes CK>> CK>>
CK>
CK>
!.!!.!!.!!!!.!.!....!!.!!!!!..!..!!.!!!..!!.!!....!!.!...!!!
...!.!.!..!.
CK>>
.!!...!....!..!.!.!!.!!.!!....!.!!!!!!..!..!.!!.!..!!.!!^C
CK>> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
CK>> 129 packets transmitted, 66 packets received,
48% packet loss CK>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
1.023/1.640/34.095/4.035 ms CK>> CK>>
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 10000
size 400 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 400
data bytes CK>> !!!!!!!!.!!!!!...!!^C CK>>
--- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics --- 20 packets
transmitted, 15 CK>> packets received, 25% packet
loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = CK>>
1.074/1.111/1.348/0.071 ms CK>> CK>>
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 10000
size 500 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 500
data bytes CK>>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!^C
CK>> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
CK>> 49 packets transmitted, 46 packets received, 6%
packet loss CK>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
1.141/1.202/2.514/0.210 ms CK>> CK>>
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 10000
size 600 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 600
data bytes CK>> CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!^C
CK>> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
CK>> 955 packets transmitted, 954 packets received,
0% packet loss CK>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
1.183/1.526/36.436/1.817 ms CK>> CK>>
kochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 10000
size 292 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 292
data bytes CK>> CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
CK>> !!!!!!!!^C!
CK>> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
CK>> 916 packets transmitted, 916 packets received,
0% packet loss CK>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
0.988/1.146/9.918/1.061 ms CK>> CK>>
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 10000
size 293 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 293
data bytes ..!!!.!^C CK>> CK>> Christian
CK>> _______________________________________________
CK>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsppuck.nether.net CK>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
CK>>
CK>>
CK>>
CK>
CK>
CK>
CK>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsppuck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
|
|
| Strange Packet Loss Problem |
|
2006-10-23 17:24:19 |
It does not look like a crc error as the counter stayed the
same
between post:
338 messages with bad checksum.
On the other hand, the throttled icmps counter is kind of
high...
Min
On 10/23/06, Christian Koch <ckochglobix.com> wrote:
> Here are some rapids with error statistics
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 56 data bytes
> !!!!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet
loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.840/0.895/1.098/0.102
ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 56 data bytes
> !!!!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet
loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.835/0.892/1.101/0.104
ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 100
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 100 data bytes
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0%
packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.856/0.870/1.072/0.022
ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 200
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 200 data bytes
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0%
packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
0.907/1.509/34.638/3.605 ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 293
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 293 data bytes
>
!.!!!!!..!.!....!.!!!!!..!.!!.!!......!!!..!..!!!.!.!....!..
!!!!!!!!....!.!..!!..!!!!!.!.!!!..!!!.!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 55 packets received, 45%
packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.016/1.251/9.847/1.172
ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 292
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 292 data bytes
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0%
packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.990/1.008/1.273/0.032
ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 294
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 294 data bytes
>
!!...!!!.!!..!!.....!.!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!.!..!!.!.!..!!!!!!!!.!
.!!!.!...!!!!!!.....!..!!!.!.!.!..!.!.!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 59 packets received, 41%
packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
1.013/1.525/22.546/2.798 ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 300
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 300 data bytes
>
!!.!!!!!!!!..!.!!!.!!!.!!.!!.!.!!.!.!!.!..!.!!!!.!!.!...!!.!
.!!.!.!.!!.!!!!!...!!..!..!!.....!!!!!..
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 60 packets received, 40%
packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.018/1.303/9.984/1.269
ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 400
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 400 data bytes
>
.!!.!!..!.!!.!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!..!!.!!..!!..!.!!.!!!.!..!..
!!!.!!.!!!.!!!!.!.!..!!!!!.!!!.!!!!!!.!.
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 68 packets received, 32%
packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
1.068/1.484/21.258/2.440 ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 700
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 700 data bytes
>
!..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 96 packets received, 4% packet
loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.260/1.333/5.439/0.432
ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 800
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 800 data bytes
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!.!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 97 packets received, 3% packet
loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.321/1.345/1.636/0.046
ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 100
size 1000
> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 1000 data bytes
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> 100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0%
packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.449/1.498/3.275/0.208
ms
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3> show system statistics icmp
> icmp:
> 0 drops due to rate limit
> 3747729 calls to icmp_error
> 0 errors not generated because old message was
icmp
> Output histogram:
> echo reply: 9220490
> destination unreachable: 3745301
> time exceeded: 1577
> time stamp reply: 472
> 2 messages with bad code fields
> 0 messages less than the minimum length
> 338 messages with bad checksum
> 2 messages with bad source address
> 28 messages with bad length
> 15 echo drops with broadcast or multicast
destinaton address
> 0 timestamp drops with broadcast or multicast
destination address
> Input histogram:
> echo reply: 51106
> destination unreachable: 5631
> source quench: 6
> routing redirect: 829
> #7: 2
> echo: 9220505
> time exceeded: 1883
> parameter problem: 1
> time stamp: 472
> time stamp reply: 1
> information request reply: 20
> address mask reply: 2
> 9220962 message responses generated
>
> cckochcore2.lhr3> show pfe statistics ip icmp
> ICMP Statistics:
> 135715 requests
> 507 network unreachables
> 96036 ttl expired
> 0 ttl captured
> 0 redirects
> 0 mtu exceeded
> 0 icmp/option handoffs
>
> ICMP Errors:
> 0 unknown unreachables
> 0 unsupported ICMP type
> 0 unprocessed redirects
> 0 invalid ICMP type
> 0 invalid protocol
> 0 bad input interface
> 38913 throttled icmps
> 0 runts
>
> ICMP Discards:
> 0 multicasts
> 0 bad source addresses
> 0 bad dest addresses
> 32 IP fragments
> 85 ICMP errors
>
> ckochcore2.lhr3>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Josef Buchsteiner [mailto:josefbjuniper.net]
> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:45 AM
> To: Christian Koch
> Cc: juniper-nsppuck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Strange Packet Loss Problem
>
> I see... lets then go back to the rapid pings and
see where
> the icmp bad checksum counter is increasing and do
then local
> loop actions...
>
> thanks
> Josef
>
> Monday, October 23, 2006, 2:38:21 PM, you wrote:
> CK>
> CK>
> CK> Hey Josef,
> CK>
> CK> Real quick, here is a regular ping which looks
fine, and a
> CK> snapshot of system icmp stats
> CK>
> CK> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping 212.71.229.25 PING
212.71.229.25
> CK> (212.71.229.25): 56 data bytes
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=0 ttl=251
time=1.113 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=1 ttl=251
time=1.063 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=2 ttl=251
time=0.957 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=3 ttl=251
time=0.995 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=4 ttl=251
time=0.947 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=5 ttl=251
time=1.429 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=6 ttl=251
time=0.934 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=7 ttl=251
time=1.017 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=8 ttl=251
time=0.935 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=9 ttl=251
time=0.973 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=10
ttl=251 time=1.138 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=11
ttl=251 time=1.003 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=12
ttl=251 time=0.946 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=13
ttl=251 time=1.172 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=14
ttl=251 time=1.002 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=15
ttl=251 time=1.009 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=16
ttl=251 time=0.921 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=17
ttl=251 time=1.009 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=18
ttl=251 time=0.959 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=19
ttl=251 time=0.973 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=20
ttl=251 time=2.362 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=21
ttl=251 time=1.034 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=22
ttl=251 time=1.007 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=23
ttl=251 time=0.913 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=24
ttl=251 time=0.959 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=25
ttl=251 time=1.021 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=26
ttl=251 time=0.996 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=27
ttl=251 time=0.966 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=28
ttl=251 time=3.044 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=29
ttl=251 time=0.940 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=30
ttl=251 time=0.946 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=31
ttl=251 time=1.054 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=32
ttl=251 time=0.989 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=33
ttl=251 time=0.973 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=34
ttl=251 time=0.963 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=35
ttl=251 time=1.028 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=36
ttl=251 time=0.954 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=37
ttl=251 time=0.965 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=38
ttl=251 time=0.999 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=39
ttl=251 time=1.003 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=40
ttl=251 time=0.897 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=41
ttl=251 time=1.126 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=42
ttl=251 time=0.913 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=43
ttl=251 time=1.058 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=44
ttl=251 time=0.942 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=45
ttl=251 time=1.030 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=46
ttl=251 time=0.941 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=47
ttl=251 time=1.047 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=48
ttl=251 time=0.938 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=49
ttl=251 time=0.954 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=50
ttl=251 time=0.964 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=51
ttl=251 time=0.976 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=52
ttl=251 time=0.944 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=53
ttl=251 time=1.006 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=54
ttl=251 time=0.972 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=55
ttl=251 time=1.585 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=56
ttl=251 time=0.990 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=57
ttl=251 time=11.160 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=58
ttl=251 time=0.948 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=59
ttl=251 time=21.018 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=60
ttl=251 time=0.996 ms
> CK> 64 bytes from 212.71.229.25: icmp_seq=61
ttl=251 time=30.768 ms ^C
> CK> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
> CK> 62 packets transmitted, 62 packets received, 0%
packet loss
> CK> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
0.897/2.029/30.768/4.634 ms
> CK>
> CK> ckochcore2.lhr3> show system statistics icmp
> CK> icmp:
> CK> 0 drops due to rate limit
> CK> 3747728 calls to icmp_error
> CK> 0 errors not generated because old message was
icmp
> CK> Output histogram:
> CK> echo reply: 9220380
> CK> destination unreachable: 3745300
> CK> time exceeded: 1577
> CK> time stamp reply: 472
> CK> 2 messages with bad code fields
> CK> 0 messages less than the minimum length
> CK> 338 messages with bad checksum
> CK> 2 messages with bad source address
> CK> 28 messages with bad length
> CK> 15 echo drops with broadcast or multicast
destinaton
> CK> address
> CK> 0 timestamp drops with broadcast or multicast
destination
> CK> address
> CK> Input histogram:
> CK> echo reply: 50251
> CK> destination unreachable: 5631
> CK> source quench: 6
> CK> routing redirect: 829
> CK> #7: 2
> CK> echo: 9220395
> CK> time exceeded: 1883
> CK> parameter problem: 1
> CK> time stamp: 472
> CK> time stamp reply: 1
> CK> information request reply: 20
> CK> address mask reply: 2
> CK> 9220852 message responses generated
> CK>
> CK> -----Original Message-----
> CK> From: Josef Buchsteiner [mailto:josefbjuniper.net]
> CK> Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 9:27 AM
> CK> To: Christian Koch
> CK> Cc: juniper-nsppuck.nether.net
> CK> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Strange Packet Loss
Problem
> CK>
> CK> Christian,
> CK>
> CK> if it is a data corruption on certain bit
patterns then
> CK> you should see this problem also without rapid
pings.
> CK> In order to find out where this happen I would
> CK> certainly perform a regular ping ( you may
need more
> CK> packets ) and watch the icmp statistics to
confirm that
> CK> it is data corruption in case you get icmp
chksum
> CK> errors. "show system statistics
icmp"
> CK>
> CK> To find out if this is local or remote ( you
could make
> CK> some statements with the icmp statistics
already
> CK> however I prefer solid results)and you need to
put this
> CK> sonet link into local loop and encapsulation
cisco-hdlc
> CK> with no-keepalive. Then you perform the ping
again with
> CK> bypass routing and interface knob to make sure
the
> CK> traffic goes out and comes back in and you
watch the
> CK> packet result and icmp statistics. This way
you will
> CK> find out if this is local M40 or remote M40.
> CK>
> CK> Once you know this it becomes kinda bit
tricky. It
> CK> could be the FPC in question that is the
trigger but
> CK> also other FPCs are contributing in the shared
data
> CK> buffer which means you would need to turn off
one by
> CK> one and see if the error stops. If you are
left with
> CK> the OC-48 then I would suggest to replace this
> CK> particular FPC. To sanity check also other
links of the
> CK> router if possible.
> CK>
> CK> Check also the message log if you ever have
seen
> CK> anytime ECC error reported. Just one of them
is already
> CK> enough to give you some hints as you would not
need to
> CK> do above isolation work
> CK>
> CK> hope this helps
> CK> Josef
> CK>
> CK> PS: yes I do have seen such symptoms in the
past
> CK> and not only on one vendor.
> CK>
> CK>
> CK>
> CK> Friday, October 20, 2006, 8:36:09 PM, you
wrote:
> CK>
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>> Hi All,
> CK>>
> CK>> I am experiencing a strange issue between 2
m40 core routers CK>> connect through an oc48 link
CK>> CK>> I experience packet loss only when
sending packets between 293 and CK>> 599 bytes.
> CK>>
> CK>> I am also speaking to cold telecom about
the issue to see if it's a
> CK>
> CK>> problem with the sonet link, but as of now
the link is not taking CK>> any errors or alarms.
> CK>>
> CK>> Anyone seen anything strange like this
before?
> CK>>
> CK>> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25
count 10000 size 300 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25
(212.71.229.25): 300 data bytes CK>> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!.!!.!!.!!!!.!.!....!!.!!!!!..!..!!.!!!..!!.!!....!!.!...!!!
...!.!.!..!.
> CK>>
.!!...!....!..!.!.!!.!!.!!....!.!!!!!!..!..!.!!.!..!!.!!^C
> CK>> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
CK>> 129 packets transmitted, 66 packets received, 48%
packet loss CK>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
1.023/1.640/34.095/4.035 ms CK>> CK>>
ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 10000
size 400 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 400
data bytes CK>> !!!!!!!!.!!!!!...!!^C CK>> ---
212.71.229.25 ping statistics --- 20 packets transmitted, 15
CK>> packets received, 25% packet loss round-trip
min/avg/max/stddev = CK>> 1.074/1.111/1.348/0.071 ms
CK>> CK>> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid
212.71.229.25 count 10000 size 500 CK>> PING
212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 500 data bytes CK>>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!^C
> CK>> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
CK>> 49 packets transmitted, 46 packets received, 6%
packet loss CK>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
1.141/1.202/2.514/0.210 ms CK>> CK>> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 10000
size 600 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 600
data bytes CK>> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!^C
> CK>> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
CK>> 955 packets transmitted, 954 packets received, 0%
packet loss CK>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
1.183/1.526/36.436/1.817 ms CK>> CK>> kochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 10000
size 292 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 292
data bytes CK>> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
> CK>> !!!!!!!!^C!
> CK>> --- 212.71.229.25 ping statistics ---
CK>> 916 packets transmitted, 916 packets received, 0%
packet loss CK>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev =
0.988/1.146/9.918/1.061 ms CK>> CK>> ckochcore2.lhr3> ping rapid 212.71.229.25 count 10000
size 293 CK>> PING 212.71.229.25 (212.71.229.25): 293
data bytes ..!!!.!^C CK>> CK>> Christian
CK>> _______________________________________________
> CK>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsppuck.nether.net CK>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>>
> CK>
> CK>
> CK>
> CK>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsppuck.nether.net
>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsppuck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
|
|
[1-2]
|
|