- Products
- Learn
- Local User Groups
- Partners
- More
Check Point Jump-Start Online Training
Now Available on CheckMates for Beginners!
Why do Hackers Love IoT Devices so Much?
Join our TechTalk on Aug 17, at 5PM CET | 11AM EST
Welcome to Maestro Masters!
Talk to Masters, Engage with Masters, Be a Maestro Master!
ZTNA Buyer’s Guide
Zero Trust essentials for your most valuable assets
The SMB Cyber Master
Boost your knowledge on Quantum Spark SMB gateways!
As YOU DESERVE THE BEST SECURITY
Upgrade to our latest GA Jumbo
CheckFlix!
All Videos In One Space
Hi mate,
Any clue why I see RX errors on wrp interface?
It's on all my warp interfaces for each VS and on all my appliances in the cluster.
Version is R81.10 take 45.
# ip -s -s link show wrp1
34: wrp1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN mode DEFAULT qlen 1000
link/ether 00:12:c1:66:a0:02 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast
52706116 1159921 2524402 0 0 0
RX errors: length crc frame fifo missed
0 0 0 0 0
TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns
643440 15320 0 0 0 0
TX errors: aborted fifo window heartbeat transns
0 0 0 0 0
Br Mille
Does not match your current version but the symptoms seems to be similar
How does it compare to errors on the other interfaces? Is it significantly higher?
There are only errors on wrp (wrp1, wrp128, wrp192 ...). There are 0 errors/drops on all other interfaces.
Ok, gotcha. I recall seeing this in old R77.xx versions when sometimes sxl was enabled, but I would be shocked if thats the case any longer. Personally, I would attempt to change MTU size and test if possible, but if not, engage TAC and see what they say. If you run cpview, can you check the values you get there?
Thx.
RX errors increases indifferent if SecureXL is on or off.
MTU is default at 1500 on all interfaces.
Both cpview, ip link, ifconfig and clish show the same RX error result.
Does not match your current version but the symptoms seems to be similar
Thx. Well found.
The SK says "These errors are cosmetic" and it does match my version R81.10 (any take).
👍
That makes sense that it is just cosmetic, as interface errors are usually due to a physical media or a physical interface problem, neither of which even exist for wrp interfaces.
Correct, i see now that it applies to the version you are running 🙂
About CheckMates
Learn Check Point
Advanced Learning
YOU DESERVE THE BEST SECURITY