"Valid frames, too small" on Cisco 3750E

Unanswered Question
Apr 26th, 2010

I have an end user reporting extremely slow file transfer times from a NAS device to a Unix server on the same subnet, in the same VLAN, and on the same switch. I want to know if the "valid frames, too small" counter as shown below is a reason for concern and could be causing these very slow transfer rates.

CSCROW-Z01>sh controllers ethernet-controller gi1/0/5


     Transmit GigabitEthernet1/0/5            Receive

   1862866361 Bytes                       3979692816 Bytes                   

   4192126749 Unicast frames              3146671050 Unicast frames          

      1101279 Multicast frames                     0 Multicast frames        

      1802353 Broadcast frames                421230 Broadcast frames        

            0 Too old frames               963966693 Unicast bytes           

            0 Deferred frames                      0 Multicast bytes         

            0 MTU exceeded frames           64883576 Broadcast bytes         

            0 1 collision frames                   0 Alignment errors        

            0 2 collision frames                   0 FCS errors              

            0 3 collision frames                   0 Oversize frames         

            0 4 collision frames                   0 Undersize frames        

            0 5 collision frames                   0 Collision fragments     

            0 6 collision frames      

            0 7 collision frames               74306 Minimum size frames     

            0 8 collision frames          1371744691 65 to 127 byte frames   

            0 9 collision frames          2262120260 128 to 255 byte frames  

            0 10 collision frames          257493741 256 to 511 byte frames  

            0 11 collision frames          351019465 512 to 1023 byte frames 

            0 12 collision frames         1863394903 1024 to 1518 byte frames

            0 13 collision frames                  0 Overrun frames          

            0 14 collision frames                  0 Pause frames            

            0 15 collision frames     

            0 Excessive collisions                 0 Symbol error frames     

            0 Late collisions                      0 Invalid frames, too large

            0 VLAN discard frames                  0 Valid frames, too large 

            0 Excess defer frames                  0 Invalid frames, too small

    653540569 64 byte frames              1336212210 Valid frames, too small 

   2277233792 127 byte frames         

    997250657 255 byte frames                      0 Too old frames          

   1022475657 511 byte frames                      0 Valid oversize frames   

     96625391 1023 byte frames                     0 System FCS error frames 

   3442871611 1518 byte frames                     0 RxPortFifoFull drop frame

            0 Too large frames        

            0 Good (1 coll) frames    

            0 Good (>1 coll) frames   

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Ganesh Hariharan Mon, 04/26/2010 - 23:03

I have an end user reporting extremely slow file transfer times from a NAS device to a Unix server on the same subnet, in the same VLAN, and on the same switch. I want to know if the "valid frames, too small" counter as shown below is a reason for concern and could be causing these very slow transfer rates.

CSCROW-Z01>sh controllers ethernet-controller gi1/0/5


     Transmit GigabitEthernet1/0/5            Receive

   1862866361 Bytes                       3979692816 Bytes                   

   4192126749 Unicast frames              3146671050 Unicast frames          

      1101279 Multicast frames                     0 Multicast frames        

      1802353 Broadcast frames                421230 Broadcast frames        

            0 Too old frames               963966693 Unicast bytes           

            0 Deferred frames                      0 Multicast bytes         

            0 MTU exceeded frames           64883576 Broadcast bytes         

            0 1 collision frames                   0 Alignment errors        

            0 2 collision frames                   0 FCS errors              

            0 3 collision frames                   0 Oversize frames         

            0 4 collision frames                   0 Undersize frames        

            0 5 collision frames                   0 Collision fragments     

            0 6 collision frames      

            0 7 collision frames               74306 Minimum size frames     

            0 8 collision frames          1371744691 65 to 127 byte frames   

            0 9 collision frames          2262120260 128 to 255 byte frames  

            0 10 collision frames          257493741 256 to 511 byte frames  

            0 11 collision frames          351019465 512 to 1023 byte frames 

            0 12 collision frames         1863394903 1024 to 1518 byte frames

            0 13 collision frames                  0 Overrun frames          

            0 14 collision frames                  0 Pause frames            

            0 15 collision frames     

            0 Excessive collisions                 0 Symbol error frames     

            0 Late collisions                      0 Invalid frames, too large

            0 VLAN discard frames                  0 Valid frames, too large 

            0 Excess defer frames                  0 Invalid frames, too small

Hi,

It cannot be a problem just check out the below things connected ports of the server are having full duplex and speed 100 Mbps setting in the switch and also check the MTU size configured in NAS end and if possible paste the show buffers stats of the switch.

Hope to Help !!

Ganesh.H

Remember to rate the helpful post

Leo Laohoo Mon, 04/26/2010 - 23:09

Whatever is connected to Gi 1/0/5 could be causing the problem.  It means that the host is sending packets with window size set with a low (or very low) value. This would cause the host to send more packets across and straining the CPU.

Actions

This Discussion