WAE disk_check.sh and disk_clean.pl

I ran the disk_chck.sh script on a WAE and disk_status.txt says 'device /dev/md2 (/state) is File system errors were detected. <snip>'. The readme for disk_clean.pl says 'Although the device is on the network, it will be offline in the CM GUI. Deleting the partitions also deleted the CMS database on this device, so you will need to delete the device on the CM, then re-enable the commands on the CLI of the device.'
What 're-enable' commands? I should execute this on the CLI of which device (WAE or CM)?
TIA.

The procedure at the following URL should get everything back up and running after the disk clean script has been run.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/webscale/waas/waas407/cfgd/maint.htm#wp1105458
Hope this helps.
Greg Scarlett
APAC TAC

Similar Messages

WAE Inline Adapter and High Availability

What is the recommendation to achieve high availability (and load sharing?) using two WAE's in a DC with inline adapters being used for interception rather than WCCPv2? Any ideas greatly appreciated.

Ken,
Generally I would recommend interception with either WCCP or a L4-7 load balancer like ACE/ACE Appliance/CSM. Both of these are considered best practice for DC deployments as they both can handle high amounts of traffic, can handle WAEs going offline and can load balance many WAEs in a cluster. WCCP might be slightly more flexible where and how you can deploy it.
Both of the following interception techniques are not recommended for data centers, but I list just as FYI:
- Inline cards in appliances can be configured in serial to give you high availability, but you don't get load balancing. The second appliance only starts optimizing traffic once the first WAE starts passing traffic through on overload. Inline interception is usually used for remote offices, however it has been deployed in DCs.
- PBR can be configured for high availability with next-hop features, however there is no available load balancing. The first WAE has to fail completely and then a second WAE can come into play. Overloaded traffic is not optimized at all.
Hope that helps,
Dan

WAE standby group and L2 redirection mask-assignment not compatible?

I have a WAE-674 connected to two 6509 switches (sup720). The two WAE ports are in a standby group. I'm also using WCCP L2 redirection from 6509 to the WAE, but I remember in older WAAS software, WAE standby group was not compatible with L2 redirection mask-assignment. Only hash could be used.
Is it still the same with the newer 4.2.1 software? I couldn't find specifics in its documentations.
Thanks
Gary

Hi Gary,
I believe you are talking about this defect: CSCso66693
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?caller=pluginredirector&method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCso66693
Now, Standby interface does work with L2 Masking.
Details about virtual standby interface:
The virtual standby interface uses the MAC address of the active interface. Standby interfaces remain unused unless an active interface fails. When an active network interface fails (because of cable trouble, Layer 2 switch failure, or other failure), and that interface is part of a standby group, a standby interface can start to carry traffic and take the load off the failed interface. With standby interface configuration, only one interface is in use at a given time.
CLI command: show interface standby 1
Please note that VB interface bridging is not supported when you are using standby interface feature.
Hope this helps.
Regards.
PS: If this answers your question, please mark it as Answered.

WAE 512 and problem with services

Hi
I have few WAE 512 installed in my network. Every use 4.1.5b software. I have problem with one. I have upgraded it from CD and after that I see below alarms:
Directy after WAE restart appear:
Major: DRE (DRE+LZ) initialization failed: <>
after about 15 minutes other alarms appear:
Critical: nodemgr: The wafs_edge service has been disabled.
Critical: Edge is down.
Do you know where should I look for a problem source ?
Thanks in advance
James

Hi
Here you are the outpu:
ps. after 3 days these alarms disapeard. When I've restarted WAE alarm appeared and after 3 days desapered again....
Physical disk information:
disk00: Present    5QD39305   (h02 c00 i00 l00 - Int DAS-SATA)
          715402MB(698.6GB)
disk01: Present    5QD392VR   (h02 c00 i01 l00 - Int DAS-SATA)
          715402MB(698.6GB)
Mounted file systems:
MOUNT POINT      TYPE       DEVICE                SIZE     INUSE      FREE USE%
/sw              internal   /dev/md0             991MB     914MB      77MB 92%
/swstore         internal   /dev/md1             991MB     880MB     111MB 88%
/state           internal   /dev/md2            5951MB     256MB    5695MB   4%
/local/local1    SYSFS      /dev/md5           14878MB    1277MB   13601MB   8%
/disk00-04       CONTENT    /dev/md4          668196MB 119653MB 548543MB 17%
.../local1/spool PRINTSPOOL /dev/md6             991MB      16MB     975MB   1%
Software RAID devices:
DEVICE NAME TYPE     STATUS                PHYSICAL DEVICES AND STATUS
/dev/md0     RAID-1   NORMAL OPERATION      disk00/00[GOOD] disk01/00[GOOD]
/dev/md1     RAID-1   NORMAL OPERATION      disk00/01[GOOD] disk01/01[GOOD]
/dev/md2     RAID-1   NORMAL OPERATION      disk00/02[GOOD] disk01/02[GOOD]
/dev/md3     RAID-1   NORMAL OPERATION      disk00/03[GOOD] disk01/03[GOOD]
/dev/md4     RAID-1   NORMAL OPERATION      disk00/04[GOOD] disk01/04[GOOD]
/dev/md5     RAID-1   NORMAL OPERATION      disk00/05[GOOD] disk01/05[GOOD]
/dev/md6     RAID-1   NORMAL OPERATION      disk00/06[GOOD] disk01/06[GOOD]
Disk encryption feature is disabled.
regards
James

WAE and filer latency

Hello, I can see some logs into our WAE (WAE-612-K9) but I cannot find any useful information to fix it:
Host X.X.X.X:445 was not discovered, bypass period: 60 sec, number of events: 1, reason: high/unknown Core<=>Filer latency
I don't understand this filer latency... I suppose the connection is not optimized? Thanks all for your help

Ping the server from the core WAE by name and Ip to ensure name resolution and connectivity.
By default, if an edge is under 5 ms or if a core WAE is over 25 ms from a file server, it will not use the CIFS AO. However, if the traffic is being intercepted, it should be using tfo, dre, and lz. This is by design as WAAS is engineered to have the cores sitting next to the file servers to eliminate the CIFS latency effects over a WAN link.
Dan

Question regarding NAT and directed-mode

Hello,
I have two WAE 574 devices and a CM 274 all running code level 4.3.1.6, The CM is behind a PIX firewall. There is no firewall between the branch and core WAE. The branch device is behind a NAT router. The CM and SSL ASA rea behind a PIX 515 firewall. The branch WAE is running inline mode and the core WAE is using WCCP redirection. Both the CM and SSL ASA are reverse NATted on the PIX firewall. The branch WAE has the primary interface unchecked on the CM and is using the NAT address.
I am getting asymmetric route issues. This is because for some reason the NAT address of the branch WAE sends the SYN which is responded to but the ACK is coming from the unnatted private address. When I turn off directed mode I can see optimisation start for some sessions but not for the SSL
ASA.
Example
Branch WAE Private 192.68.1.45
Branch WAE Public 206.99.88.10
CM private 192.168.20.9
CM public 240.10.10.20
PIX log
an 15 2012 11:50:58: %PIX-6-106015: Deny TCP (no connection) from 192.68.1.45/46871 to 240.10.10.20/443 flags PSH ACK on interfe
Although the PIX NATs the CM address, the core WAE is still still seeing it's private address.
Do you have any idea what could be causing this ?
Best regards
Stephen
Jan 15 2012 11:51:12: %PIX-5-106100: access-list DMZ_access_in denied tcp DMZ/192.168.20.9(443) -> outside/206.99.88.10(46871) hit-cnt 1 f]
Jan 15 2012 11:51:31: %PIX-6-106015: Deny TCP (no connection) from 192.68.1.45/46871 to 240.10.10.20/443 flags PSH ACK on interfe
Jan 15 2012 11:51:37: %PIX-6-106015: Deny TCP (no connection) from 192.68.1.45/46847 to 240.10.10.20/443 flags PSH ACK on interfe
Jan 15 2012 11:52:08: %PIX-6-106015: Deny TCP (no connection) from 192.68.1.45/49634 to 240.10.10.20/443 flags PSH ACK on interfe
Jan 15 2012 11:52:10: %PIX-5-106100: access-list outside_access_in permitted tcp outside/206.99.88.10(23183) -> DMZ/240.10.10.20(443) ]
Jan 15 2012 11:52:10: %PIX-6-302013: Built inbound TCP connection 1475554768 for outside:206.99.88.10/23183 (206.99.88.10/23183) to DMZ:WAD)
Jan 15 2012 11:52:10: %PIX-6-106015: Deny TCP (no connection) from 192.68.1.45/23183 to 240.10.10.20/443 flags ACK on interface e

Hi Stephen,
To troubleshoot this further, we would need to get a topology diagram of your network, as well as the configurations from all devices, so it would probably be better if you open a TAC service request.
Regards
Daniel

CM 4.4.7 Online and End Devices 4.2.3c Offline status

Hallo all,
I am running WAE-512-K9 and the Central Manager was upgraded to 4.4.7 and the Some Application Accelerators are running 4.2.3c and they seem to be showing "offline status " but they are still optimizing save for the status being "offline"
What could be the Issue here ?

Hi Erasmus,
Are all accelerators running version 4.2.3c showing offline or just few? If all on same version are showing offline it could incompatibility issue between versions.
You can also go to the application accelerator CLI and execute the command:
show cms info
See what it shows. Check the connectivity between accelerator and CM. If it is fine and nothing has changed (like FW rules in between accelerator and CM) try doing the below and see if that resolves the issue.
cms deregister force.
Once deregistered go to config mode and do "cms enable".
Check the show cms info again.
Regards,
Kanwal

What is the best 3845 IOS code level with an NMW-WAE-522?

I'll be using WCCP to redirect. I'm running 12.4(20)T right now - is that good enough for the WCCP functions?

We use 12.4(15)T5 on our 3845's with WAE-522's and don;t have any problems.

WAAS: Packets sent to another WAE

Hello,
Just wondering why after a WAAS reboot, the first WAE devices that was normally handling the bulk of the optimization traffic is now sending packets to the second WAE device? Shouldn't WCCP be smart enough to know this is the lead WAE and to continue optimizing?
show wccp wide-area-engine
Wide Area Engine List for Service: TCP Promiscuous 61
Number of WAE's in the Cache farm: 2
Last Received Assignment Key IP address: x.x.x.68
Last Received Assignment Key Change Number: 11
Last WAE Change Number: 5
Assignment Made Flag = FALSE
        IP address = x.x.x.69      Lead WAE = NO   Weight = 0
        Routers seeing this Wide Area Engine(2)
                x.x.x.193
                x.x.x.197
        IP address = x.x.x.68      Lead WAE = YES Weight = 0
        Routers seeing this Wide Area Engine(2)
                x.x.x.193
                x.x.x.197
Wide Area Engine List for Service: TCP Promiscuous 62
Number of WAE's in the Cache farm: 2
Last Received Assignment Key IP address: x.x.x.68
Last Received Assignment Key Change Number: 11
Last WAE Change Number: 5
Assignment Made Flag = FALSE
        IP address = x.x.x.69      Lead WAE = NO   Weight = 0
        Routers seeing this Wide Area Engine(2)
                x.x.x.193
                x.x.x.197
        IP address = x.x.x.68      Lead WAE = YES Weight = 0
        Routers seeing this Wide Area Engine(2)
                x.x.x.193
                x.x.x.197
show wccp gre
Transparent GRE packets received:              557
Transparent non-GRE packets received:          0
Transparent non-GRE non-WCCP packets received: 0
Total packets accepted:                        291
Invalid packets received:                      0
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:            0
Packets dropped due to no redirect address:    0
Packets dropped due to loopback redirect:      0
Pass-through pkts dropped on assignment update:0
Connections bypassed due to load:              0
Packets sent back to router:                   0
GRE packets sent to router (not bypass):       516
Packets sent to another WAE:                  71

ok I understand the WCCP hashing/mask and the bucket assignments, with HASH you only get 50% and you can't carve it up to get more granular. The question I have is when a WAE is rebooted and returns to participate in WCCP, why is 100% of the traffic being redirected to the rebooted WAE then being sent to the other WAE? I would like is so when the rebooted WAE is back online it receives the original connections without sending it to the other WAE. It's and extra hop that doesn't seem right, all traffic is sending to the rebooted WAE but then turns around and sends it out to the other WAE for optimization. If it's maintaining existing connections that I can understand, but for new connections its establishing on the other WAE, not the rebooted one. The only way I figured around this is de registering/re registering WCCP at the same time on both WAEs.
So by disabling WCCP flow control help in this situation?

WAAS and WCCP

Hello ,
I have many Qs regarding the WAAS implemntation
1- which better , using inline card or wccp and why ( is there any problem with inline cards ?)
2- if we have ASA in the network , is there any os version required for the ASA to support tha WAAS, we have impelmnted the waas with wccp between 2 branches, all traffic optimized but there is 2 applications blocked ( not working at all ) , the 2 applications passing via Firewall is there any known reason for that ?
3- we have cat4500 and it should support wccp to redirect traffic for WAAS , but redirect list is not supported at all, do you know if that for all 4500 platform or for just specific OS or Sup as nothing clear on Cisco regarding this point ( wccp redirect list ).
Thanks
Moamen

Hey Moamen,
1. I would not say either is better, but there are different applications. Where you need more then a single WAE for scaling and redundancy, I would recommend WCCP. Where you have fairly simple topology, requirements for only one WAE, and/or non-Cisco gear, I would probably recommend In-line. I've done ton's of both and both work really well for interception.
2. ASA do have a minimum recommend code version. For interoperability with WAAS, you need Cisco ASA/PIX version 7.2.3 or later. In that version, there is the command "inspect waas" to allow for the sequence number jump in optimized traffic, which is why your ASA is blocking the traffic.
3. The CAT4500 can support WCCP in hardware. The platform hardware only supports ingress interception, L2-redirect, L2-return, mask-assign configs on the WAE and the minimum IOS version I would recommend running would be 12.2(40)SG or later. As you mentioned, there are limitations with the redirect lists, they are NOT supported in any version of IOS, it's a function of the hardware. If you need to exclude traffic, you might want to consider using application policies when using CAT-4500.
I hope that helps you out.
Dan

Possible ways on WAE/WAVE software version upgrade

Which way(s) would be the best and recommended way to software upgrade the WAE/WAVEs in remote sites?
(1) push the software image to the WAE devices through CM, and reload the WAE through CM
(2) copy the software image to the WAE using CLI and install (copy ftp install [ftp server] / [image.bin]), and reload the WAE in CLI
(3) copy the software image to the WAE in advance (copy ftp disk [ftp server] [remote dir] [remote filename] [local filename]), and install the image file during the maintenance window (install image [image.bin]), and then reload the WAE in CLI
It's always happen, that some sites are remote, far away from the CM in physical distance, and it takes time for pushing the image from CM to the end site device.
Thanks!

Hi Joe,
My preferred method is #3, "copy ftp install". Although what I do is perform this before my maintenance window on all devices using the "show version pending" command to verify the new version is installed and ready. Then during the window perform the reload one device at a time starting of course with the CM.
Jan

WAE- 674 with EMC SRDF Traffic Question ?

Hi all,
I have a WAAS demo at a customer.
I have installed two WAE 674 boxes inline, at both ends of a 50mbps Metro Ethernet line between two EMC SANs. These EMC storages perform huge data replication during the day. All of the traffic is EMC SRDF traffic, nothing else.
Before putting the WAEs inline, the Metro line utilization had been around 49Mbps, ok so the WAN link was fully utilized. WAE 674s installed and bandwidth usage has dropped %12 percent, something around 44 Mbps.
EMC guys are telling me that, before WAAS, it used to take 7 hours to copy a 40GB data from one site to the other, with WAAS it came down to 1.5 hours. So yeah I know story is great so far.
What I dont understand is the attached graphics taken from CM, WAE1 and WAE2. All I see is %20 reduction in original traffic. Shouldnt this value be much greater than that ? Otherwise what could be the reason of having much shorter replication times compared to before ?
I have gone through couple of datasheets and marketing slides about WAEs and I have seen that with EMC replication traffic WAAS causes at least 2x optimization.
Both WAEs have default configs, so I havent customized anything in the SRDF classifier on WAAS.
I would really appreciate it, if some of you , can go through the screenshots that I attached and give me some thoughts and diretion to what value to customized and etc.
Thanks in advance.
Dumlu

You will want to explore CSCsg30875 to see how it applies to your installation
CSCsg30875 wccp blocking telnet to router
Since 12.3T is EOL, it probably was not tested and may or may not exist in that Cisco IOS track.
End-of-Sale and End-of-Life Announcement for Cisco IOS Software Release 12.3T
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/iosswrel/ps8802/ps6947/ps5207/prod_bulletin0900aecd803a0ffe.html
Thank You,
Dan Laden

NME-WAE-502-K9 & RME

The NME-WAE-502-K9 shows as an unknown device type in RME. The SysObjectID returns as .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.1.1210; however, the RME supported device table says it should be 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.1.823. I have confirmed the device credentials are correct. The inventory & config archive are working. What do I need to do to ensure RME recognizes the NM correctly?

Hi Drew,
Very interesting. I'm actually working with another customer at present who has both nme-wae-502 and nme-wae-522 devices, and both of these are returning sysObjectID 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.1.823 (ciscoNmWae) , which according to the LMS 3.2 Supported Devices documentation is correct - http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/net_mgmt/ciscoworks_lan_management_solution/3.2/device_support/table/lms32sdt.html.
In my investigation of this other problem I did come across 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.1.1210 (ciscoNmWae502) & 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.1.1211 (ciscoNmWae522) but couldn't explain why the different sysObjectID's
From my customer I see :
Cisco Wide Area Application Services Software Hardware Version: nme-wae-502-4.0.23.4
Cisco Wide Area Application Services Software Software Release 4.0.23 (build b4 Apr 20 2009)
AND
Cisco Wide Area Application Services Software Hardware Version: nme-wae-522-4.1.3a.32
Cisco Wide Area Application Services Software Software Release 4.1.3a (build b32 Jun 18 2009)
You are seeing :
Cisco Wide Area Application Services (WAAS-UNIVERSAL-K9) Software Release 4.2.1 (build b38 Jun 16 2010)
Version: nme-wae-502-4.2.1.38
So what I think has happened here, is that in the later release of WAE software that you are running, the new sysObjectID's have been introduced to uniquely identify the nme-wae-502 and nme-wae-522. Unfortunately these new sysObjectID's are not recognised by LMS/RME hence it's showing as an Unknown device type in RME.
I'll need to lodge a request to have support for these new sysObjectID's added to LMS. Not sure how long this will take before it becomes available though.
Derek

WAE Issues

Dear ,
I have two sites connected through MPLS cloud.Site A to MPLS cloud is 10 Mb Link,Site B to MPLS 100 Mb Link.At Side A Cisco WAE is installed,and site B WAE and WAAS (Central Manager) is connected.
There are servers like Fileserver and ACS servers are placed at Side B.Now WAE is compressing and decompressing between Side A and Side B and vise versa.
It was working fine.No configuration changes made.But all of a sudden from Side A to Side B the services are not working.Like, From side A trying to access the ACS server through RDP is not working.It is hanging.At the same time ICMP ping is perfect,no drop,then telnet with 3389 is connecting,meantime Netstat -an shows clearly the 3389 is established.
But RDP is not working,I am not able to open the Fileserver to download and upload (Copying).
For time being I have disconnected the WAE at site A.Now without WAE it is working fine.
Please help me to resolve this issue.
Thansk and Regards,
S.Venkat

Sure, with WAE, it adds extra TCP option and that increase the packet size, and typically the overall packet is more than 1500 bytes, therefore, the connectivity fails. If we lower the MTU MSS negotiated, the overall packet after the option addition will be no more than 1500 bytes, and will pass through the network just fine. Ethernet MTU is normally 1500 bytes.
Hope that answers your question.

WAAS Raid or Hard disk failure

I encounter the issue to bring up the WAE-612-K9, and stay on the Raid controller screen with booting in loop.
On the Raid Controller screen, it displays the below message and seems detecting the Hard drive. Afte waiting around a few minutes, it will boot from the BIOS again.
===
Adaptec Serial Attached SCS (SAS) BIOS V1.2-1 1706
(c) 1998-2006 Adaptec, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
<<< Press <Ctrl><A> fro Adaptec SAS/SATA Configuration Utility! >>>
Ctrl #00: AIC-9405 SAS/SATA at PCI Slot:00, Bus:03, Dev:04, Func:00
Serial Number = ORG
RAID Support: Disabled
95
=====
Can anyone share your thought and the configuration screen of BIOS and RAID controller for reference?
Thanks.

Hi
We faced similar issue and recovered by making the device to default factory settings.
Insert the recovery CD and follow below instruction
Installer Main Menu:
1. Configure Network
2. Manufacture flash
3. Install flash cookie
4. Install flash image from network
5. Install flash image from cdrom
6. Install flash image from disk
7. Recreate RAID device (WAE-674/7341/7371 only)
8. Wipe out disks and install .bin image
9. Exit (Eject and reboot)
Choice [0]:
Make sure that you select following option exactly in this order: 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 (twice), and 9".
Regards,
Bala

WAE disk_check.sh and disk_clean.pl

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for