0
0

It looks like there is an issue with extracting certain information from the VIRL devices, See logs below:

[2017-03-24] [12:09:16.910 PM] MainForm.PopulateDeviceData for Ipaddress 172.16.1.147 – BEGIN
[2017-03-24] [12:09:16.912 PM] PopulateDeviceData starts.
[2017-03-24] [12:09:16.913 PM] No Duplicate Device
[2017-03-24] [12:09:16.915 PM] MainForm.PopulateDeviceData.deviceIdValues
[2017-03-24] [12:09:18.492 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving device data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:19.805 PM] TerminalBase.GetDeviceValues – BEGIN
[2017-03-24] [12:09:19.945 PM] TerminalBase.GetDeviceValues – END
[2017-03-24] [12:09:19.946 PM] TerminalCmdParser.GetDeviceValues – BEGIN
[2017-03-24] [12:09:19.947 PM] TerminalCmdParser.GetDeviceValues – END
[2017-03-24] [12:09:19.949 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving interface data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.115 PM] 172.16.1.147 Completed retrieving interface data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.117 PM] MainForm.PopulateDeviceData.PopulateDeviceInterface
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.118 PM] GigabitEthernet0/0
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.120 PM] MainForm.PopulateDeviceData.PopulateDeviceInterface
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.121 PM] GigabitEthernet0/1
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.122 PM] MainForm.PopulateDeviceData.PopulateDeviceInterface
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.123 PM] GigabitEthernet0/2
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.124 PM] MainForm.PopulateDeviceData.PopulateDeviceInterface
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.126 PM] GigabitEthernet0/3
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.127 PM] MainForm.PopulateDeviceData.PopulateDeviceInterface
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.128 PM] GigabitEthernet0/4
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.130 PM] MainForm.PopulateDeviceData.PopulateDeviceInterface
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.131 PM] GigabitEthernet0/5
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.132 PM] MainForm.PopulateDeviceData.PopulateDeviceInterface
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.133 PM] Loopback0
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.135 PM] 172.16.1.147 Finished retrieving interface data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:20.136 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving IpAddrTable data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.026 PM] 172.16.1.147 Started retrieving IpAddrTable data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.028 PM] 172.16.1.147 Finished retrieving IpAddrTable data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.030 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving IpNetToMediaEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.272 PM] TerminalCmdParser.ParseSwitchIpNetToMediaEntry – BEGIN
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.273 PM] TerminalCmdParser.ParseSwitchIpNetToMediaEntry – END
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.275 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving IpNetToMediaEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.276 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving IpNetToMediaEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.277 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving IpNetToMediaEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.278 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving IpNetToMediaEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.279 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving IpNetToMediaEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.280 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving IpNetToMediaEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.281 PM] 172.16.1.147 Finished retrieving IpNetToMediaEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.283 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving IpRouteEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.554 PM] TerminalCmdParser.GetIpRouteValues – BEGIN
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.557 PM] TerminalCmdParser.GetIpRouteValues – END
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.559 PM] 172.16.1.147 Finished retrieving IpRouteEntry data
[2017-03-24] [12:09:22.560 PM] 172.16.1.147 Retrieving Localsystem data
[2017-03-24] [12:10:23.033 PM] 172.16.1.147 – Response reading timed out.
[2017-03-24] [12:10:23.035 PM] Device could not be added successfully

It seems it timed out retrieving Localsytem data. What is it extracting at this point?

 

  • You must to post comments
0
0

Hi Jim,

LocalSystem uses these commands.

IOS Devices

show version

show memory

show processes cpu

NX-OS

show version

show system resources

Can you send the output from that device?

Thank you!

Brad

  • You must to post comments
0
0

The show memory command might be the problem. It went on and on, and I finally just killed it. I wonder if that is a virtual IOS version problem.

  • brad
    Ok. That should not have caused a problem because we only record the first 10 lines of output – we use term length 10 and exit out with q – we don’t pull the entire output of show memory. I have a feeling it might be that we are expecting the — MORE — and not seeing it correctly.
  • You must to post comments
0
0

Interesting. I am fairly certain it parses the output the same way. I will check by setting the term length myself first and paste the output here.

  • You must to post comments
0
0

So I set the term length to 10 and ran the command

America#terminal length 10
America#sho mem
Head Total(b) Used(b) Free(b) Lowest(b) Largest(b)
Processor E2AE880 297343872 67211324 230132548 224986920 224728748
I/O 8DAE880 89128960 74384624 14744336 14713088 14531452
Processor memory

I/O memory

Address Bytes Prev Next Ref PrevF NextF Alloc PC what
08DAE880 0000035296 00000000 08DB7290 000 0 0 03D26120 (coalesced)
08DB7290 0000000656 08DAE880 08DB7550 001 ——– ——– 03D26065 *Init*
08DB7550 0000000272 08DB7290 08DB7690 001 ——– ——– 0020F678 *Packet Data*
08DB7690 0000000272 08DB7550 08DB77D0 001 ——– ——– 0020F678 *Packet Data*

The interesting thing is that the first time I hit q it jumped to I/O memory so I had to hit q again. Not sure if that is what you expected to see.

  • You must to post comments
0
0
Are you saying that you had something like this: 

QOSTESTSW01#sh mem        
                Head    Total(b)     Used(b)     Free(b)   Lowest(b)  Largest(b)
Processor    1D13D8C    36870772    19255616    17615156    16309184    11132976
      I/O   80000000     8388608     3014508     5374100     5130780     5142344


 --More--

 

and you pressed q and that didn’t exit you out of the show mem command?

That could be the problem. I have not seen that.

Just a note also – just checked the code – we set the length to 10 because we previously set it to 0 – so you really don’t need to set it to 10 if you never set it to 0 – we are looking for –More– and once we see it we send the letter q which should exit the show memory command output.

  • You must to post comments
0
0

At this point I think I have determined that as much as Cisco wants to claim VIRL is almost the same as the real thing, it is not. Too much quirkiness and since it isn’t something anyone would use in production, I am going to stop focusing on it with bitB and move on to using it with real equipment.

Thanks!

  • brad
    Ok. Sounds like a plan. Thank you for the feedback!
  • You must to post comments
0
0

Is there a bug specific to the index out of bounds error when trying to click on the physical topology with no devices in the database?

  • You must to post comments
Showing 7 results
Your Answer

Please first to submit.