WAAS WCCP help

Hi guys,
Please have a look at my topology attached.Right now this is what I have configured on the core:
ip wccp 61
ip wccp 62
int vlan 151
ip wccp 61 redirect in
int vlan 173
ip wccp 62 redirect in
The same is configured on the branch office with the appropriate vlans.
Whatever I do, the "total packets redirected" count never seems to increase. I tried turning on ip wccp 62 redirect out on vlan 173, and ip wccp 61 redirect in on the same vlan, but then only the count for service 61 goes up.
Also, should I use access-lists to permit redirection only to branch offices that have a WAE? If I don't use a redirect-list, shouldn't all packets be redirected to the WAE, and then the WAE would decide whether to optimize or not based on if there's another WAE at the endpoint location?
Here's an output of "sh ip wccp 61 detail"
WCCP Cache-Engine information:
Web Cache ID: x.x.x.x
Protocol Version: 2.0
State: Usable
Redirection: L2
Packet Return: GRE
Packets Redirected: 0
Connect Time: 00:51:22
Assignment: MASK
Any help is greatly appreciated.

Since you are performing L2 rewrite under WCCP, you will not see the packets redirected increase. The redirection is handled by hardware instead of software. If redirection was done on a router, you would see packet increases.
I have had WAAS in place for about a year now and you can see below that I have only redirected 2 packets. I am redirecting on a 6509 as well.
mp1swcr01#show ip wccp 61
Global WCCP information:
Router information:
Router Identifier:
Protocol Version: 2.0
Service Identifier: 61
Number of Cache Engines: 2
Number of routers: 2
Total Packets Redirected: 2
Redirect access-list: WAAS_61
Total Packets Denied Redirect: 9179
Total Packets Unassigned: 186
Group access-list: -none-
Total Messages Denied to Group: 0
Total Authentication failures: 0

Similar Messages

  • WAAS Design Help Needed - URGENT!

    Hi,
    I am currently designing and implementing a WAAS solution for s client in their Data Center. It is deployment of a single Accelerator and one CM.
    It has been decided that the WAAS accelerator (7341) will have its two NICs connected to two of their core switches (both 6500). The two core switches have a Layer 3 Etherchannel link between them and are running OSPF for network convergence (i.e. Layer 2 connectivity is not used).
    I am facing a problem in the design, since I know that the Active/Standby configuration for the accelerator would require a redundant gateway via HSRP (at least) but this is not possible in a routed environment in the core switches. Furthermore, I am to run WCCPv2 for redirection.
    Therefore, I am confused as to how to proceed in such a case considering that I can only configure one default gateway on the accelerator when I need high availability on two different subnets.
    Please assist at your earliest.
    Thanks.

    Amir,
       Considering your question below
    "I am facing a problem in the design, since I know that the Active/Standby configuration for the accelerator would require a redundant gateway via HSRP (at least) but this is not possible in a routed environment in the core switches. Furthermore, I am to run WCCPv2 for redirection."
    Do WAE is configured for Standby interface and is this your Primary Interface as well? If answer is yes then see below
    You will need a common VLAN for WAAS on both 65K swicthes in order for Active / Standby interface to work properly.
    1: When using OSPF make sure your tcp flows has both ingress and egress flows transit from same switch
    2: Use Generic GRE method for Egress under WAAS intercept configuration.
    Since you are running WCCP each swicth will be able to redirect its TCP traffic via GRE Tunnel to WAAS and WAAS will send the packet back to the same swicth. This will ensure packet path is not modified when WAAS / WCCP is introduced.
    Also make sure that you do not have any WCCP redirect on Layer 3 connection between 2 swicthes. Let me know if this helps.
    Ahsan Khan

  • Router IOS requirements to work with WAAS WCCP?

    Can some help me with up to date switch and router IOS requirements to work with WAAS WCCP configuration? There used to be a Cisco document explaining that but I can't find it any more.
    Here is out WAAS 4.2.3 deployment in the network:
    Data center: Cat6500 Sup720-3B running IOS 12.2(18)SXF12a will do WCCP L2 redirection. I've seen minimum Sup720 IOS requirement of 12.2(18)SXF13 in one place and 12.2(18)SXF16 in another, but there are also examples of using 12.2 (18) SXF5. Which one is the latest Cisco recommendation?
    Remote sites: 3825 and 3845 routers (some are running 12.4 T train and some are in 12.4 main line) will do WCCP GRE redirection to WAE's. One of the routers will use a WAE-NME-522 module. Others are WAE applicances. Again, what are the latest Cisco recommendations?
    Another question: for an IOS release, does it matter which package to use, such as advanced IP services, enterprise services, or SP services?
    Thanks a lot.

    Here you go.
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/prod/collateral/contnetw/ps5680/ps6870/white_paper_c11-608042.html
    For IOS release, you will need a package that has WCCP support.
    Hope this helps.
    Regards.
    PS: Please mark this as Answered, if this answers your question.

  • How does QoS work with WAAS WCCP? What's the interaction between QoS Traffic Classification and WAE Traffic Application Policy?

    How does QoS work with WAAS WCCP? What's the interaction between Router QoS Traffic Classification and WAE Traffic Application Policy?

    By default, WAAS preserves the DSCP marking on intercepted packets.  There is a configuration option to set/override the DSCP value at the global (device), application, and classifier levels.  Currently WAAS provides marking only.  There is no action taken by WAAS based on the DSCP value.
    Regards,
    Zach

  • WAAS - WCCP redirect inbound

    Hello Everyone,
    I notice on our 1841 router running version 12.4(22)T, the wccp redirect inbound method does not process through CEF. It will only process it through an outbound redirection. The 61 redirect inbound is applied to the subinterface on fas 0/0.
    Any ideas ?
    interface FastEthernet0/0.999
    description ****Dublin User Vlan****
    encapsulation dot1Q 999 native
    ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.192
    ip helper-address 134.65.181.11
    no ip redirects
    no ip proxy-arp
    ip wccp 61 redirect in
    ip wccp 62 redirect out
    ip flow ingress
    no ip mroute-cache
    service-policy input DBN_LAN

    You must configure these devices to use WCCP Version 2 instead of WCCP Version 1 because WCCP Version 1 supports web traffic (port 80) only. When you enable the TCP promiscuous mode service (WCCP Version 2 services 61 and 62) on a WAE and a router, you do not need to enable the CIFS caching service (WCCP Version 2 service 89) on the router or WAE.
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/app_ntwk_services/waas/waas/v401/quick/guide/wsqcg401.html#wp1357416

  • WAAS WCCP 6500 ACL Redirection

    /* Style Definitions */
    table.MsoNormalTable
    {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
    mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
    mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
    mso-style-noshow:yes;
    mso-style-priority:99;
    mso-style-qformat:yes;
    mso-style-parent:"";
    mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
    mso-para-margin:0in;
    mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
    mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
    font-size:11.0pt;
    font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
    mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
    mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
    mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
    mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
    mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
    mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
    mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
    mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
    Hi All
          I'm sure I'm missing something simple here on a new install and I hope some one can point it out easily.  I implemented the following config which worked except it understandably broke connections as everything got redirected.  I'm running the WCCP config on a 6500 running 12.2(18) SXF
    This config showed total redirected packets climbing sharply in a 'show ip wccp' on the 6500 but this config broke other things.
    WAE:
    interface GigabitEthernet 1/0
    ip address 10.254.0.251 255.255.255.248
    ip default-gateway 10.254.0.249
    wccp router-list 1 10.254.0.249
    wccp tcp-promiscuous router-list-num 1 l2-redirect mask-assign
    6500:
    ip wccp 61
    ip wccp 62
    interface Vlan<vlans to be accelerated>
    description Local VLAN to be accelerated
    ip wccp 61 redirect in
    interface Vlan <WAAS vlan>
    description WAAS Devices(CM and WAE)
    ip address 10.254.0.249 255.255.255.248
    interface Vlan <Vlan for WAN transit>
    description Incoming WAN VLAN
    ip wccp 62 redirect in
    To try and limit redirection to just LAN space I swapped this:
    ip wccp 61
    ip wccp 62
    for this:
    /* Style Definitions */
    table.MsoNormalTable
    {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
    mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
    mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
    mso-style-noshow:yes;
    mso-style-priority:99;
    mso-style-qformat:yes;
    mso-style-parent:"";
    mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
    mso-para-margin:0in;
    mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
    mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
    font-size:11.0pt;
    font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
    mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
    mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
    mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
    mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
    mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
    mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
    mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
    mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
    Ip access-list ext WAAS_Inbound
      Permit ip 10.22.0.0 0.0.255.255 10.0.0.0 0.0.255.255
    Ip access-l ext WAAS_Outbound
    Permit ip 10.0.0.0 0.0.255.255 10.22.0.0 0.0.255.255
    Ip wccp 62 redirect-list WAAS_Inbound
    Ip wccp 61 redirect-list WAAS_Outbound
    Once I did this, 'show ip wccp'  on the 6500 stopped showing redirected packets but did start showing packets being denied redirect.  Optimization stopped(according to the GUI) and I saw no hits on the access-lists(should I?).
    Thanks for your help in advance.

    A fews questions/comments:
    What type of Supervisor are you using?
    What is the exact version of software you are using?
    The fact that the 'packets redirected' counter is incrementing is a bad thing on the 6500.  It means that the redirection is happening in software.
    Can you also provide the output from the following commands:
    sh ip wccp
    sh ip wccp 61 det
    sh ip wccp 62 det
    Thanks,
    Zach

  • WAAS WCCP from fortinet

    hello,
    I need your help, we want to configure WCCP on WAE but the customer have a fortinet  firewall in agencies.
    Has anyone had to do this type of setup ?
    what are the  WCCP services 61 and 62? did I need to configure also to Fortinet?
    Thanks for your help.

    Hi Fatoumata,
    The WCCP service is a number specified in the protocol to define what kind of traffic is going to be matched, so, it's not relevant for a firewall.
    To allow WCCP traffic to go through a firewall (assuming it's located between the WAE and the router), you just need to allow UDP port 2048 in both directions.
    If what you need to do is allowing the optimized traffic to go through the FW (which would happen if you have the FW between the router and the WAN link), then, you would need to enable some kind of WAAS inspection on the Fortinet firewall to allow the modifications that WAAS does on the TCP packets (adding a TCP option in the SYN and SYN/ACK packets and a sequence number shift after the TCP handshake). Unfortunately, I don't know how this can be done because I'm not familiar with that firewall.
    Regards
    Daniel

  • WAAS wccp tcp-promiscuous service-pair configuration question

    I have a WAE 512 that I upgraded to 4.5.1, the WCCP configuration was automatically changed in the configuration to the following:
    wccp router-list 1 192.168.20.1
    wccp tcp-promiscuous service-pair 61 62 failure-detection 30
    wccp tcp-promiscuous service-pair 61 62 router-list-num 1
    wccp version 2
    I have a WAVE-674 that I am going to replace this 512 with and I installed 5.0.1 on the 674.  I went through the automatic setup process and the wccp configuration came up like this:
    wccp router-list 7 192.168.20.1
    wccp tcp-promiscuous service-pair 1 2
    router-list-num 7
    exit
    And it informed me that I needed to put the wccp redirects for 61 in on LAN and 62 in on WAN, standard on the router and wccp 2, which I already have done.
    My question is, should my 5.0.1 configuration look the same as my 4.5.1 configuration, or does it matter?  I only found one document on the internet that had this "wccp tcp-promiscuous service-pair 1 2" in a Cisco PDF document where they were removing it to put some GRE specific configurations. 

    hi Beau,
    something went wrong with the new WAVE 674 wccp configuration,  if the wccp router is the same (192.168.20.1) make sure it looks the same as in 4.5.1 version.
    Also for devices with WAAS version 5.0, you must explicitly configure the egress method.
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/app_ntwk_services/waas/waas/v501/configuration/guide/traffic.html#wp1275623
    if you need assistance choosing the right egress method I suggest to open a TAC case.
    hope that helps!

  • WAAS - WCCP L2-redirection in WS-C6509-E

    Hi,
    I have a costumer with three offices, one is the data center. The other two offices get information from the data center and between them.
    Each one of these remotes offices go through two different SP to the data center, and each one is received in his own router. The core of the data center is a switch WS-C6509-E (IOS s72033-entservicesk9_wan-vz.122-18.SXF7.bin).
    Because there are two different SP in the data center, the traffic redirection must be done in the switch c6500. I think that the following configuration is the correct one:
    ip wccp version 2
    ip wccp 61 redirect-list 101
    ip wccp 62 redirect-list 101
    interface Vlan1
    description *** WAN routers and users ***
    ip address 10.0.16.1 255.255.240.0
    ip wccp 62 redirect out
    ip wccp 61 redirect in
    interface Vlan 200
    description *** WAEs ***
    ip address 10.34.114.65 255.255.255.252
    ip wccp redirect exclude in
    interface Vlan201
    description *** Servers and Users 1 ***
    ip address 10.15.240.1 255.255.240.0
    ip wccp 61 redirect in
    interface Vlan202
    description *** Servers and Users 2 ***
    ip address 10.16.128.1 255.255.240.0
    ip wccp 61 redirect in
    But now I read about the problems using GRE redirection in the switch c6500. I read too that the best way to do this is using L2-redirection, but I don't have any idea of how to do this. I am using the WAAS version 4.1.1.
    Can anybody help me with explaining me the way to configure that?

    Dan,
    I think that the best option for this network is number one, use WCCP on the two 7206VXRs, and redirect the traffic to a single WAE in the same subnet of the hosts.
    But now, I don't understand the implications of use the command “egress-method negotiated-return intercept-method wccp”. What else should I consider or configure (in the router or in the WAE) to make this interception works?
    I think that the configuration on the routers and in the WAE should be something like this:
    --- Router 1
    ip wccp version 2
    ip wccp 61 redirect-list 101
    ip wccp 62 redirect-list 101
    interface Serial3/3:1
    ip address 10.34.113.213 255.255.255.252
    ip wccp 61 redirect in
    ip wccp 62 redirect in
    interface GigabitEthernet0/1
    ip address 10.0.16.2 255.255.240.0
    ip wccp redirect exclude in
    --- Router 2
    ip wccp version 2
    ip wccp 61 redirect-list 101
    ip wccp 62 redirect-list 101
    interface Serial3/3:1
    ip address 10.134.143.217 255.255.255.252
    ip wccp 61 redirect in
    ip wccp 62 redirect in
    interface GigabitEthernet0/1
    ip address 10.0.16.3 255.255.240.0
    ip wccp redirect exclude in
    --- WAE
    interface GigabitEthernet 1/0
    ip address 10.0.16.4 255.255.255.0
    exit
    egress-method negotiated-return intercept-method wccp
    wccp router-list 1 10.0.16.2 10.0.16.3
    wccp tcp-promiscuous router-list-num 1
    Thanks and Regards,
    Pablo

  • WAAS, wccp service groups and DC/Branch deployment

    Hi,
    I have two design queries relating to wccp service groups and WAAS in DC and branch deployments.
    Firstly, lets say at the DC end I use wccp service 61 (source address) on the WAN interface of my edge-layer switches. I configure the L3 interfaces on the same switches (connecting to the LAN side) to use use wccp service 62 (destination address). The WAEs are using L2 at the edge layer; with masking etc.
    I've read that at the branch office you need to 'reverse' the service group setup - so that if I have the same sort of setup at the branch using 3750s and WAEs then the WAN interface should be using wccp service 62 and the LAN side using wccp service 61.
    If I assume that is correct, then how does this affect things when two branches are communicating with each other (and they are both setup the same) - will be waas not be effective in this scenario? (Assume that the DC waas does not see any branch-to-branch communication).
    What happens if you have a consistent design across your network (61 on WAN, and 62 at LAN interfaces across all WAAS sites)?
    Secondly, when using L2 wccp redirection and masking; do most deployments leave the mask as default (0x1741)? I'm thinking that in some situations it might be better to have an entire geographic location covering a few branches being sent to the same DC end WAE. For example, I might want everyone on a /24 subnet in one branch to be using the same WAE/dre cache at the DC; rather than the possibility of duplicate dre caches on DC end WAEs service the same branch subnet (I realise that redundancy might be an advantage should one DC WAE fail).
    Is there a table/calculator somewhere that can work out what mask I could use to cover /24 or /22 or even /16 subnets to direct requests to the same WAE at the DC?
    Thanks
    Cameron

    Cameron,
    Excellent questions. Rule of thumb is to use source IP based load balancing, so in the branches 61/LAN - 62/WAN and in the DC 61/WAN and 62/LAN. That being said, if there is some site to site traffic at the edges, you may get some splitting, however, unless there is enough traffic to make it a "mini-dc", changing the services around is generally a wash. Also, if you only have a single WAE at the edge, it won't matter either.
    On the mask, default mask is definitely not desirable. I generally use Calc and convert my desired Mask from Binary to Hex. The following examples are assuming 4 bit masks, but you can use from 1 up to 6 or 7 max bits if you need more buckets.
    If you are looking to group /24, you could be 0xF00 or similar.
    If you are looking to group /22, use 0x3C00 or similar
    When calculating your mask, don't put your bits in the host bits, only in the network bits. Also, remember that the leftmost bit is usually the decision maker, so don't make it too far to the left or all your traffic will be on one WAE. The less WAEs in your WCCP cluster, the less bits you should use in your mask (allow some extras for fault tolerence).
    Hope that helps,
    Dan

  • WAAS / WCCP service groups / L2 adjacencies

    Hi all,
    I'm having trouble finding a definitive answer on this one. I'm working on a WAAS deployment in a network with asymmetric routing. I want to deploy WAAS accelerators at two geographically dispersed data centre sites (head end). Do the WAAS boxes themselves need to be L2 adjacent with each other in this configuration? i.e. can the service group consist of two routers (one at each DC) and two WAEs (one at each site), with routed links between the DCs (WAEs in separate IP subnets)?
    Something like:
    - two routers (rtr-A, rtr-B)
    - two WAAS accelerators (waas-A, waas-B)
    - rtr-A and waas-A are L2 adjacent and use WCCP w/L2 redirection
    - rtr-B and waas-B are L2 adjacent and use WCCP w/L2 redirection
    - rtr-A and waas-B are not L2 adjacent and use WCCP w/GRE redirection
    - rtr-B and waas-A are not L2 adjacent and use WCCP w/GRE redirection
    Here's a quick diagram:
    http://i4.tinypic.com/62nhf5u.jpg
    (all links are L3/routed)
    cheers!

    Dale,
    There is no requirement for the WAE's to be L2 adjacent to each other. Note that the WCCP Forwarding Method is negotiated per Service Group -- so it can either be L2 or GRE. Based on your description, you would want to use GRE Forwarding.
    Regards,
    Zach

  • WAAS: WCCP Mask or Hash on Routers?

    I'm starting thinking about using mask assign on an ISR router running 12:4(24)T with GRE/GRE. Has anyone done this before and can you use mask assign with GRE/GRE? We need to use it with GRE/GRE because our egress method has to be WCCP return. My thought was mask assign will be much better at load balancing across multiple WAEs in a cluster than hash because you can specify a long mask assignment. Right now, see more load on WAE than the other and are sometimes getting TFO overload.

    The page you linked contains recommendations (in bold) for each platform. On the ISR G2 specifically, you should be able to use any combination of GRE/L2 and MASK/HASH assignment. Some other platforms require specific disribution and redirection methods to maintain the hardware acceleration of WCCP traffic. However, the ISR G2 does not have this requirement.
    WCCP GRE and HASH distribution on ISR G2 is typically recommended to make deployment easier. With GRE, content devices can be an L3 hop away (if needed), and it reduces the chance of customers accidentally creating a WCCP redirect loop.
    L2 distribution and HASH redirection method should typically require the least CPU and memory load on the ISR. These should perform the best in most cases.
    The MASK distribution method gives better controls on how load is divided between multiple content devices, typically at the cost of more CPU and memory utilization. If you have only one or two content devices in your cluster, typically HASH will meet the need for slightly less CPU. As Zach said, most times MASK is used on the Datacenter side to give the ability to 'tweak' how the load is distributed across multiple devices.
    Thanks,
    Aaron

  • WAAS WCCP Errors

    Any one know what "Spoofed packets dropped" and the "Packet pullups needed" are? Is the WAAS dropping packets it thinks it's being spoofed? Also, how can I get rid of the pullups? The WCCP setup is as follows; l2 forward/return to a 3750E stack switch, interfaces are setup as standby and the model is a 7371. I'm not using any WCCP redirect list.
    Transparent GRE packets received: 0
    Transparent non-GRE packets received: 1940435323
    Transparent non-GRE non-WCCP packets received: 0
    Total packets accepted: 461319375
    Invalid packets received: 731
    Packets received with invalid service: 0
    Packets received on a disabled service: 0
    Packets received too small: 0
    Packets dropped due to zero TTL: 0
    Packets dropped due to bad buckets: 617
    Packets dropped due to no redirect address: 0
    Packets dropped due to loopback redirect: 227
    Pass-through pkts dropped on assignment update:61
    Connections bypassed due to load: 0
    Packets sent back to router: 1829
    GRE packets sent to router (not bypass): 0
    Packets sent to another WAE: 63037
    GRE fragments redirected: 1116193
    GRE encapsulated fragments received: 0
    Packets failed encapsulated reassembly: 0
    Packets failed GRE encapsulation: 0
    Packets dropped due to invalid fwd method: 0
    Packets dropped due to insufficient memory: 0
    Packets bypassed, no conn at all: 0
    Packets bypassed, no pending connection: 0
    Packets due to clean wccp shutdown: 0
    Packets bypassed due to bypass-list lookup: 166
    Packets received with client IP addresses: 460833489
    Spoofed packets dropped: 57416
    Conditionally Accepted connections: 0
    Conditionally Bypassed connections: 0
    L2 Bypass packets destined for loopback: 0
    Packets w/WCCP GRE received too small: 0
    Packets dropped due to received on loopback: 219
    Packets dropped due to IP access-list deny: 0
    Packets fragmented for bypass: 0
    Packets fragmented for egress: 0
    Packet pullups needed: 5484
    Packets dropped due to no route found: 0

    Any one know what "Spoofed packets dropped" and the "Packet pullups needed" are? Is the WAAS dropping packets it thinks it's being spoofed? Also, how can I get rid of the pullups? The WCCP setup is as follows; l2 forward/return to a 3750E stack switch, interfaces are setup as standby and the model is a 7371. I'm not using any WCCP redirect list.
    Transparent GRE packets received: 0
    Transparent non-GRE packets received: 1940435323
    Transparent non-GRE non-WCCP packets received: 0
    Total packets accepted: 461319375
    Invalid packets received: 731
    Packets received with invalid service: 0
    Packets received on a disabled service: 0
    Packets received too small: 0
    Packets dropped due to zero TTL: 0
    Packets dropped due to bad buckets: 617
    Packets dropped due to no redirect address: 0
    Packets dropped due to loopback redirect: 227
    Pass-through pkts dropped on assignment update:61
    Connections bypassed due to load: 0
    Packets sent back to router: 1829
    GRE packets sent to router (not bypass): 0
    Packets sent to another WAE: 63037
    GRE fragments redirected: 1116193
    GRE encapsulated fragments received: 0
    Packets failed encapsulated reassembly: 0
    Packets failed GRE encapsulation: 0
    Packets dropped due to invalid fwd method: 0
    Packets dropped due to insufficient memory: 0
    Packets bypassed, no conn at all: 0
    Packets bypassed, no pending connection: 0
    Packets due to clean wccp shutdown: 0
    Packets bypassed due to bypass-list lookup: 166
    Packets received with client IP addresses: 460833489
    Spoofed packets dropped: 57416
    Conditionally Accepted connections: 0
    Conditionally Bypassed connections: 0
    L2 Bypass packets destined for loopback: 0
    Packets w/WCCP GRE received too small: 0
    Packets dropped due to received on loopback: 219
    Packets dropped due to IP access-list deny: 0
    Packets fragmented for bypass: 0
    Packets fragmented for egress: 0
    Packet pullups needed: 5484
    Packets dropped due to no route found: 0

  • Urgent ! Router-WAAS WCCP problem

    I have dot1q enabled 7507 connecting frame relay branch to data centre.
    Core WAAS sits on a VLAN subinterface.
    As soon as I enable "ip wcccp redirect 61 in" on VLAN trunked interface, I am loosing connection to the branch.
    the config is here..
    interface GigabitEthernet4/0/0
    description Core Data Centre Trunk VLAN 3,120 to SWDC03 3/16
    no ip address
    no ip redirects
    no ip unreachables
    no ip proxy-arp
    load-interval 30
    negotiation auto
    no cdp enable
    interface GigabitEthernet4/0/0.3
    description Core Data Centre VLAN
    encap dot1q 3
    ip address xxxx
    ip wccp 61 redirect in
    no ip redirects
    no ip unreachables
    no ip proxy-arp
    ip nbar protocol-discovery
    ip route-cache flow
    no cdp enable
    standby 3 ip 10.64.205.17
    standby 3 priority 150
    standby 3 preempt
    interface GigabitEthernet4/0/0.120
    description Core WAAS VLAN120
    encap dot1q 120
    ip address yyyyyyy
    ip wccp redirect exclude in
    no ip redirects
    no ip unreachables
    interface Serial0/0/3.64 point-to-point
    ip wccp 62 redirect in
    The IOS version is rsp-jsv-mz.123-17b and WAAS version 4.0.13.I have tested this before without VLAN trunking on another router using a seperate interface and it was working.Any idea ?
    thanks

    thanks guys. I will explain the problem a bit more.When WAAS sits on a seperate i/f on WAN router, it works fine. i.e "wccp redirect 61 in " on interface connecting WAN router to Data Centre and "wccp redirect 62 in" on WAN frame relay. Then I configured the i/f connecting WAN router to Data Centre as dot1q trunk and a dedicated VLAN is created for WAAS. The default gateway for WAAS is HSRP address in 6509s. The WCCP router address configured in WAAS is the loopback0 address of the WAN router. The "wccp redirect 62 in" on WAN frame relay stays same. However, " wccp redirect 61 in " carried to a new subinterface on the same access as WAAS VLAN.
    All WCCP commands show that there is a connection between WAAS and WAN router, packet count goes up. However, all TCP sessions to the brach (initiated from the Data Centre) fail. I have also tested with and without "wccp redirect exclude in" on WAAS VLAN subinterface without success. Since I had to install the branch the WAAS on the weekend, I moved WAAS back to dedicated interface on WAN router. It works fine but I can not implement redundancy.
    The suggestion was to make WAN router subinterface HSRP active rather than 6509 MSFCs.So WAAS talks to WAN routers loopback address and default gateway also points to the same router rather than MSFC. I have not had a chance to test this but I will test in the coming weeks. I was also suggested to use layer2 redirection on 6509 but did not have any chance to look at it closely.
    thanks
    Serhat

  • WAAS- WCCP config on ISR with NME

    Is the "ip wccp redirect exclude in" command needed under the "interface Integrated-Service-Engine for the NME"? I am not running inline.

    Jeff,
    The 502 and the 512 are definitely different size boxes.
    NME-502 can handle up to 500 Optimized TCP connections and has a 120 GB hard drive with 1 GB of RAM.
    WAE-512-1GB can handle up to 750 Optimized TCP connections and has a 250 GB hard drive (optional RAID 1) with 1 GB of RAM.
    WAE-512-2GB can handle up to 1500 Optimized TCP connections and has a 250 GB hard drive (optional RAID 1) with 2 GB of RAM.
    So they should be directed at different size of sites as there is more processing power as well as disk cache space on the WAE-512. The NME-522 can handle roughly the same number of connections as the WAE-512, however it still doesn't have as much disk space for cache.
    Hope that helps,
    Dan

Maybe you are looking for