[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference netcad::hub_mgnt

Title:DEChub/HUBwatch/PROBEwatch CONFERENCE
Notice:Firmware -2, Doc -3, Power -4, HW kits -5, firm load -6&7
Moderator:NETCAD::COLELLADT
Created:Wed Nov 13 1991
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:4455
Total number of notes:16761

1984.0. "Hubwatch , Valid counter info, reporting 'runts'" by KAOFS::B_CORBIN (I travel the Thousand Islands) Wed Feb 08 1995 16:59

    During a course on the DECHUB 900 we setup a lan in the 
    lab and did some tests . We wanted to set off alarms on
    a hubwatch workstation using good and bad traffic.
    
    Using IRIS on a PC we cloned a good frame and generated traffic 
    through a Ethernet twisted pair port on a Dec repeater 900TM.
    Using Hubwatch we monitered the port and watched the frames/sec. 
    We also monitered lan traffic on a second PC running IRIS. 
    What we noticed that their seem to be a big difference in the 
    frames per second reported by IRIS and HUBWATCH. I believe
    that we saw on the IRIS pc 1000 f/s and HUBWATCH reported
    250 f/s .
    
    A second experiment we tried was with bad frames. We were able
    to capture a "runt" packet using Iris. We cloned it and generated
    traffic again through a port on a DECrepeater 900tm. This traffic
    consisted entirely of "runt" frames. We could monitor this again
    using a second PC running IRIS. HUBWATCH however did not report
    on these frames at all. The port detailed window showed a count of 
    0 on frames/second and 0 also on bad frames.
    
    Are these two situations valid? Is this a limitation of how SNMP
    is used to gather information from the MIBs in a device?
                                  
    Brian
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name		DateLines