kstak

Might be worth testing the monitor before you go through the hassle of changing the power...

I don't think bandwidth is the issue. The link mostly handles low bandwidth traffic like rdp and ssh but it does handle a good deal of that traffic. It could be a packet per second issue but think the HP 4018GL is rated 72 million pps. If that was the issue, I think I would see the issues going from switch A to switch B w/o routing and I only see it from switch A to B when it is first routed. Could the routing be handled differently if the traffic doesn't originate from the switch? That seems like a long shot but I plan to do some testing to try and verify that but have not had the time yet. I also plan to test a secondary router when they let me. More pieces to the puzzle... switch A port A1 counters - Up 9 days. switch B port A1 counters

Disclaimer: This isn't my configuration. I inherited this. I personally would change a number of things including taking the routing off the switches but I have to prove that will fix it.... also I changed these ips so if I missed something, apologies. I just noticed that switch A has "ip default-gateway 192.168.1.7" which is wrong but "sh ip route" and the ip routing configuration have the proper gateway of ip default-gateway 192.168.2.4. Switch A won't let me take out "ip default-gateway" without disabling ip routing first and I can/t do that right now. I am not sure that would cause an issue because the routing table appears correct but it will be my next step just to see if it helps. Today I am not seeing much loss (1 dropped in 1000) but still do see some lag spikes. It is only from some on switch A going to some device on switch B and it is only from 192.168.2.0/24 to 192.168.1.0/24. Swtich B is basically un-configured. Switch A is semi-configured. The client has switch A vlan2 192.168.1.7 as the main router for their 192.168.1.0/24 network. There are some servers on 192.168.2.0/24. The main internet router/firewall is at 192.168.1.4 @Marshall_IT A1 on both switches is the link. They are not tagged. @CyberNerd I am pretty confident there isn't any looping. Switch B is all servers with short patch cables directly to the servers. I suppose something could be looped on A but I would think I would be seeing other issues on A. Switch A Switch B

First post but this appears to be a great forum so I hope to participate more... Here is my problem: I have two procurve 4108GLs that are connected by fiber. They both have the latest firmware. One of them (A) has 2 vlans. Vlan1 is the default with a subnet of 192.168.2.0/24. Vlan2 has a subnet of 192.168.1.0/24. The switch is routing between the vlans successfully. Switch B has the default vlan1 with a subnet of 192.168.2.0/24. The switches are connected via the fiber on subnet 192.168.1.0/24. There is no other configuration. Everything appears to work fine. However, under high load I start loosing packets going from vlan1 on switch B (192.168.1.0/24) to vlan1 on switch A (192.168.2.0/24). I do not loose packest on swtich A going from vlan1 to vlan2. I do not loose packets going from vlan1 switch B to vlan2 switch A. The vlans shouldn't matter since switch B is basically an expensive unmanaged switch. Can the routing on switch A just be overloaded? I see ~40% cpu average. But why does switch A vlan1 to vlan2 have no issues then? Do the vlans matter even if I am not passing any info? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.