DFM alarm message: Ecessivefragmentation

[yatao]

We are just starting to use Device Fault Manager to monitor our network. A lot of our catalyst switch have this alarm message: MEM-"ip address"/9[CLUSTER]-EcessiveFragmentation.

We checked those switches, no obvious problem found. Anyone has suggestion?

Thanks,

Yatao

[dhollarnii]

We have same issue on ours too.. We have newly installed 6500's

[bealla]

Drill down to the polling and threshold editor in DFM (in the admin console) and take a look at what your settings are.

I bet that you have never changed them and are using the defaults ( which in this case – at least in my system - are like 0.02% of the threshold which is set at 5.0%.

So if .02% (.002) of the 5% allowed to be “fragged” it will generate an alarm message.

I am in the process of reviewing ALL the setting to clear this up ( and other errors that squeal when there is no real problem.)

Basically it looks like there are two ways to keep “un-needed” alarms from annoying you (and scaring the non-engineer) and they are:

1 - Set filters in the monitoring console you share or export or display.

2 – Change the thresholds to what YOU want to be concerned about.

Dat’s all folk. - andy

[sknorr]

bealla,

changing the treshold so you don't get the alarm anymore doesn't solve the problem. I have the same fragmentation problem with my 6509s. I know that I could change the threshold but that doesn't explain where the fragmentation came from.

[liamwalk]

I had the same problem - check the following URL:

http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/rtrmgmt/cw2000/dfm/dfm1_1/u_g/defaults.htm#xtocid150015

Since Cisco say that memory and processor polling of Cisco switches is not supported in DFM, I just disabled the option.

[andrea.meconi]

Try to install cw-dfm-ids111 patch and loot at cw-dfm-ids111 readme file.

Andrea.