Agree.
From cisco troubleshooting guide:
drops: the number of packets dropped due to a full queue.
https://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/internetworking/troubleshooting/guide/tr1904.html
Queueing is correct answer. Ignore the 16bit madness, he even referred to queueing as an issue. 255/255 reliability is perfect score 1/255 txload and 1/255 rxload indicate idle interface load.
B is correct
"Total output drops: 100" indicating that packets are being dropped due to the output queue being full.
This suggests that there may be congestion or insufficient resources to process outgoing traffic.
With "0 output errors, 0 collisions" and given the presence of output queue drops, the most likely cause for the drops would be temporary periods of congestion where the traffic rate exceeded the interface's capacity, leading to a scenario typically addressed by:
B. queueing
If the input rate is consistently double the output rate, it may indicate a potential issue or an asymmetry in the traffic flow. This could lead to a queueing condition, where the input queue is building up because the rate of incoming packets is higher than the rate at which they are being processed and sent out.
In this case, "B. queueing" becomes a more relevant option. The input queue is shown as 175/300, indicating that the input queue is at 175, with a maximum size of 300. The higher input rate compared to the output rate could contribute to the input queue filling up.
Therefore, considering the input rate being double the output rate, "B. queueing" would be a suitable choice in this context.
D. duplex mismatch
Explanation:
The key indicator in the provided output is the line:
Full-duplex, 100 Mb/s, 100BaseTXJFX
This line indicates that the interface is configured for full-duplex operation. However, in a full-duplex environment, you would expect to see both "txload" and "rxload" at 255/255 (indicating no congestion). In this case, the "txload" and "rxload" are at 1/255, suggesting that there may be an issue.
A common cause for this type of behavior is a duplex mismatch. A duplex mismatch occurs when one device (in this case, the router interface) is set to full-duplex, and the device on the other end (potentially a switch or another router) is set to half-duplex or vice versa. This can lead to performance issues, dropped packets, and general instability in the network.
So, based on the provided output, the condition occurring is a duplex mismatch.
Queueing is incorrect. The term "queueing" typically refers to how packets are handled in the output queue of a network interface. In the provided output, the relevant information is:
Queueing strategy fifo
Output queue. 50/300 (size/max)
This indicates that the queueing strategy is "fifo" (first in, first out), and it shows the current size and maximum size of the output queue. In this case, the output queue is not experiencing congestion because the size (50) is well below the maximum size (300).
While the output queue has a finite capacity, it doesn't necessarily indicate an issue or condition on the interface unless it becomes consistently full, leading to drops or delays.
In contrast, a duplex mismatch issue, as indicated by the "txload" and "rxload" values of 1/255, typically points to a mismatch in the duplex settings between devices, which can lead to performance problems, collisions, and other issues. The duplex mismatch is a more likely cause of degraded performance in this specific scenario.
Therefore, based on the provided output, the condition is more indicative of a duplex mismatch than a queueing issue.
upvoted 1 times
...
...
...
Log in to ExamTopics
Sign in:
Community vote distribution
A (35%)
C (25%)
B (20%)
Other
Most Voted
A voting comment increases the vote count for the chosen answer by one.
Upvoting a comment with a selected answer will also increase the vote count towards that answer by one.
So if you see a comment that you already agree with, you can upvote it instead of posting a new comment.
metegampi25
Highly Voted 11 months, 2 weeks agoNian
1 week agonemostis
Most Recent 7 months ago[Removed]
8 months agoxxismailh0
8 months, 1 week agolmmujsi
8 months, 2 weeks agokalitwol
8 months, 3 weeks agoIidear
10 months, 3 weeks agofd17639
10 months, 3 weeks ago16BitRun
11 months, 2 weeks ago16BitRun
11 months, 2 weeks ago16BitRun
11 months, 2 weeks ago16BitRun
11 months, 2 weeks ago16BitRun
11 months, 2 weeks ago