interface Collisions

I have recently switched ISP's and went from a single T1 to two bonded T1's.  The wierd thing is that users are actually having slower response times with more bandwidth.  Any Ideas?

Also I looked at the ethernet interface and saw a ton of errors.  I switched the duplex to half instead of full and the errors seemed to go away.

Now I have a ton of collisions.  Below is the info.  Are the collisions possibly due to the fact there are 10 Hubs on this network rather than switches?  Are there any other explainations for the collisions?

5 minute output rate 915000 bits/sec, 200 packets/sec
     65527 packets input, 21072302 bytes, 0 no buffer
     Received 0 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
     0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
     0 input packets with dribble condition detected
     75489 packets output, 47300687 bytes, 0 underruns
     0 output errors, 7417 collisions, 0 interface resets
     0 babbles, 0 late collision, 2311 deferred
     0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
     0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out
Rowdyone52Asked:
Who is Participating?
 
neowolf219Connect With a Mentor Commented:
Hi Rowdyone52,

You probably have a speed mismatch issue.  When you say "Are the collisions possibly due to the fact there are 10 Hubs on this network rather than switches?" are you talking about what the users plug into.  

What exactly is the output above from.  

for instance (and your environment might not be setup as below, as the router and switch could possibly be the same

User -------- hub ------- switch ----- router ------ISP

Did the output above come from the switches interface tied to the hub, or the switches interface tied to the router/ISP?
0
 
Rowdyone52Author Commented:
The output is from the 2611 Router Ethernet0/0 interface

The Setup is as follows

100's of Users --> Many Stacked Hubs / A Few Switches --> Cisco 515 Pix --> Cisco 2600 Router --> ISP

0
 
neowolf219Commented:
Okay, I'm going to assume that your ethernet 0/0 interface is going to the PIX.  If this is wrong let me know.

As mentioned, I would go ahead and specify your PIX interface going to the 2611 and the 2611 interface (again, assuming it is the one shown above) to the PIX to have identical duplex and speed configured respectively (you've said you have already hard coded the duplex).

If that doesn't work, let me ask a few questions ahead.  You say you have a "bundled" T1.  What does this configuration look like in your Router.  Do you mean you have two separate T1's with policy routing?  

Also, what do your other interfaces look like.  are you getting errors on the interface connected to your ISP? What about at the switch level?

Lastly, did all of this occur when you added the second T1?  Just as a point of reference to when this started to occur.

0
Never miss a deadline with monday.com

The revolutionary project management tool is here!   Plan visually with a single glance and make sure your projects get done.

 
neowolf219Commented:
I forgot, but just to make sure, try a different patch cable on the interface your having issues with.  You know all that layer one stuff ... i.e lenght, possible electronic interfence, etc.
0
 
Rowdyone52Author Commented:
Ethernet0/0 does go to the PIX.

The T1's are bonded using the MFR interface to bond them together and act as one line.

There are no collisions occuring on any interface except for the Ethernet0/0 Interface.

I dont really know if the collisions have always occured. I would assume so, I have not been part of this project until recently.

0
 
neowolf219Commented:
Can you try setting those interfaces to match?  Also, do a "clear counters" to get everything back to 0, and then verify if you are still getting collisions or not.  
0
 
lrmooreConnect With a Mentor Commented:
Agree with neowolf219..

Eth 0/0  <---> PIX Outside
Crossover cable, or switch in between?

BOTH interfaces must be configured the same, either half-duplex, auto, or full-duplex.

Collisions are a result of half-duplex operation and are fully expected, as long as they don't go over 10% of the total packets, and it appears you are well under that threshold..


0
 
Rowdyone52Author Commented:
Crossover cable.  

Tonight ill check out the devices.  Thanks for all of the information.
0
 
Dr-IPCommented:
100 users on hubs, that’s crazy, especially since for less than 300 dollars you can get enough switches to replace all the hubs, and significantly improve network performance. Not only that, it’s likely to improve internet performance, and probably will be a step in the right direction to solve your collision problem, if not eliminate it. If you can spare an extra couple of hundred dollars and have some newer servers that have 1 gig NIC’s, buy a 1 gig switch to hook them to it, and link all the other 10-100 switches to it for the best bang for the buck.  
0
 
Rowdyone52Author Commented:
Trust me I would prefer switches.  Im working on someone else's network that hasnt been kept up to date.  Its planned to replace them when the budget is available.
0
 
Dr-IPCommented:
300 dollars compared to the salaries of 100 people is a drop in the bucket. I have no doubt hubs with that many users is easily costing at least that much a week in lost productivity due to slow network performance, if not several times as much. The fact is even the cheapest junky switch is better than the best hub ever made. This is the kind of thing where it shouldn’t be left until some feels they have the funds for it; it’s something that needs to be done.

I don’t know about you, but I’d either get them to find the money to do what is needed, or tell them they will need to find someone else to work on their mess. If I can get a bankrupt company to spend 10K dollars for a new billing server by showing them the old server was costing that much every few months due to the delays, and problems the old server was causing, selling someone the need to speed 300 dollars for a few new switches should be a cake walk.  
0
 
Dr-IPCommented:
Think of this by the way, if the switches can save every user just 1 minute a day, they will pay for themselves in a month, as that will save over 36 man hours a month that users spend waiting on the network.
0
 
neowolf219Commented:
I know what Rowdyone is talking about.  Customer gets that glaze look in their eyes, but Dr-IP is also right.  Another way to look at it is to put up how much you are billing them to come in and fix this issue, as oppose to getting a network up and running that doesn't need to be touch but every so often. If they keep having problems, they keep having to pay for service.  This often works well for me.  

I feel your pain ... good luck!!
0
 
fullermsCommented:
Having users on hubs should not cause collisions on a link between a PIX firewall and the router. Same for the ISP links which I assume are serial or some flavour of DSL. Try setting the PIX and Router interfaces to the same Speed / Duplex settings. Check the physical layer.

Of course as rightly mentioned by the other memebers, you need to bring in switches for your users too.
0
All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.