From: Carlos G Mendioroz (tron@huapi.ba.ar)
Date: Mon Dec 08 2008 - 17:13:48 ARST
Well,
I was not able to do it at pod8:
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
02:04:57: %EC-5-UNBUNDLE: Interface TenGigabitEthernet1/50 left the
port-channel
Port-channel3..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No so litle difference, pod 8 had no FWSMs...
-Carlos
Scott M Vermillion @ 8/12/2008 16:07 -0200 dixit:
> Cisco just called and asked me to update my case with more details so that
> they could escalate it. I included a brief mention of your troubles with
> Pod1 as well. Seems most of us have had some kind of issue with that
> specific rack and none to speak of on any of the others, so maybe Cisco can
> get to the bottom of it. One suggestions that I made was simply to assign
> someone to try to complete the entire lab scenario on that rack to see what
> comes of it. Also asked them to look for any log entries related to
> err-disable events on the core switch ports attaching to Pod1...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott M Vermillion [mailto:scott@it-ag.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 10:45 AM
> To: 'Carlos G Mendioroz'
> Cc: 'Luan Nguyen'; 'CCIE Lab'
> Subject: RE: OT: GOLD Labs On PEC?
>
> Well, as I recall, this is some strange development release of code compiled
> specifically for the lab scenario, no? I guess we can't assume it's
> entirely bug-free. Not entirely clear that we can assume >VSS< is bug-free
> for that matter! ;~) But it's still good sport...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carlos G Mendioroz [mailto:tron@huapi.ba.ar]
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 10:42 AM
> To: Scott M Vermillion
> Cc: 'Luan Nguyen'; 'CCIE Lab'
> Subject: Re: OT: GOLD Labs On PEC?
>
> This was on pod1 too.
> I'll see if I can reproduce it, but the log of the console speaks for
> itself. Nothing really strange, just the etherchannels, three vlans, ...
>
>
> Scott M Vermillion @ 8/12/2008 15:36 -0200 dixit:
>> Agreed. I did some extracurricular breaking of things and this was not a
>> problem area. I too played around with preemption towards the end and
>> verified connectivity from the c4948. My only problems were early on and
>> related to a loss of connectivity to the core switch from the VSS. Seemed
>> the core switch ports had gone into err-disable or something. Had to
> start
>> over on a new pod after an hour of frustration. Talked to another CCIE
> who
>> had the same issue on the same pod (Pod1) with ultimately the same fix
>> action. I have a support case open on the matter and Cisco is responding,
>> so that should hopefully be resolved soon...
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Luan Nguyen [mailto:luan@netcraftsmen.net]
>> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 10:25 AM
>> To: 'Carlos G Mendioroz'
>> Cc: 'Scott M Vermillion'; 'CCIE Lab'
>> Subject: RE: OT: GOLD Labs On PEC?
>>
>> Re: 2) I never had any problem with one port left the Po, and you
> shouldn't
>> either :)
>> I would suggest to try again, ping from client 3 instead and do some debug
>> on the 4948.
>>
>> Luan Nguyen
>> Chesapeake NetCraftsmen, LLC.
>> www.NetCraftsmen.net
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Carlos G Mendioroz [mailto:tron@huapi.ba.ar]
>> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 11:54 AM
>> To: Luan Nguyen
>> Cc: 'Scott M Vermillion'; 'CCIE Lab'
>> Subject: Re: OT: GOLD Labs On PEC?
>>
>> Luan Nguyen @ 8/12/2008 14:42 -0200 dixit:
>>> 1) Those are the 6 etherchannels between the FWSM and the switch.
>>> When you reload switch 1, you only see 6 for switch 2. Once everything
> is
>>> back, you will see 2 Pos for switch 1 and switch 2 each with 6 ports.
>> Stupid me :) Yup, I did power down one of the FWSMs to make the
>> switchover faster, that explains the asymmetry.
>> I did not engage into associating the second number to the slot
>> in the chasis.
>>
>>> 2) Not sure what you did, but if one port left the channel, that status
>>> should be Te1/50(D) - D for down, and the port-channel should still
>>> function.
>> I did an etherchannel between the 4948 and one port of each 6500,
>> trunking, and a ping between an SVI at the 4948 and one at the 6500.
>>
>> -Carlos
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Luan Nguyen
>>> Chesapeake NetCraftsmen, LLC.
>>> www.NetCraftsmen.net
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>>> Carlos G Mendioroz
>>> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 6:51 AM
>>> To: Scott M Vermillion
>>> Cc: 'CCIE Lab'
>>> Subject: Re: OT: GOLD Labs On PEC?
>>>
>>> I've just done it (the lab).
>>> There were a couple of things that I would like to understand,
>>> if someone has a clue.
>>>
>>>
>>> 1) show etherchannel summary showed some bundles that the config
>>> had no hint about:
>>>
>>> Group Port-channel Protocol Ports
>>>
> ------+-------------+-----------+-------------------------------------------
>>> ----
>>> 1 Po1(RU) - Te1/1/4(P) Te1/1/5(P)
>>> 2 Po2(RU) - Te2/1/4(P) Te2/1/5(P)
>>> 3 Po3(SU) PAgP Te1/2/2(P)
>>> 4 Po4(SU) LACP Gi1/3/1(P)
>>> 10 Po10(RD) PAgP Te1/2/1(D)
>>> 580 Po580(SD) -
>>> 596 Po596(SD) -
>>>
>>> This is some time after a switchover.
>>>
>>> While stable, they showed:
>>> 580 Po580(SD) -
>>> 596 Po596(SU) - Gi2/4/1(P) Gi2/4/2(P) Gi2/4/3(P)
>>> Gi2/4/4(P) Gi2/4/5(P) Gi2/4/6(P)
>>>
>>> but all Gi ports where config default.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2) That switchover was produced by preemtion, and one of the
>>> etherchannels stayed down from the 4948 perspective:
>>>
>>> pod1-4948-10G#ping
>>> Protocol [ip]:
>>> Target IP address: 10.252.11.1
>>> Repeat count [5]: 1000000
>>> Datagram size [100]: 4000
>>> Timeout in seconds [2]:
>>> Extended commands [n]:
>>> Sweep range of sizes [n]:
>>> Type escape sequence to abort.
>>> Sending 1000000, 4000-byte ICMP Echos to 10.252.11.1, timeout is 2
>> seconds:
>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>> 2d16h: %EC-5-UNBUNDLE: Interface TenGigabitEthernet1/50 left the
>>> port-channel Po
>>> rt-channel3............................................
>>> ......................................................................
>>> ......................................................................
>>> ........
>>> pod1-4948-10G#sh etherc sum
>>> Flags: D - down P - in port-channel
>>> I - stand-alone s - suspended
>>> R - Layer3 S - Layer2
>>> U - in use f - failed to allocate aggregator
>>> u - unsuitable for bundling
>>> w - waiting to be aggregated
>>> d - default port
>>>
>>>
>>> Number of channel-groups in use: 1
>>> Number of aggregators: 1
>>>
>>> Group Port-channel Protocol Ports
>>>
> ------+-------------+-----------+-------------------------------------------
>>> ----
>>> 3 Po3(SU) PAgP Te1/49(P) Te1/50(P)
>>>
>>> pod1-4948-10G#ping 10.252.11.1
>>>
>>> Type escape sequence to abort.
>>> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.252.11.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
>>> .....
>>> Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
>>>
>>> Any ideas ?
>>> -Carlos
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Scott M Vermillion @ 4/12/2008 21:55 -0200 dixit:
>>>> Incidentally all, the VSS lab pods are back online and available for
>>> either
>>>> immediate booking or scheduled booking. I think it's great that Cisco
>> has
>>>> something like this and I'd sure love to see more of it (how many of us
>>> have
>>>> two 6500s w/ Sup 720 10GE VSS in our home labs?!). I would think one
> way
>>> to
>>>> encourage Cisco to continue with this type of investment is to make use
>> of
>>>> it. Please, if you have any interest in playing around with (admittedly
>>>> fairly basic) VSS and have access to PEC, take the time to do this lab.
>>>> It's scheduled for four hours but can be completed in half (or less)
> that
>>>> time by a CCIE or CCIE lab candidate with basic proficiency of L2 and L3
>>>> EtherChannels, etc. This lab even includes a shared server and a
>>>> pod-specific server with VMWare hosts for connectivity testing, etc.
>> It's
>>>> way cool - especially given the price!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Scott M Vermillion [mailto:scott@it-ag.com]
>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 2:34 PM
>>>> To: 'CCIE Lab'
>>>> Subject: OT: GOLD Labs On PEC?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Howdy all,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Anybody know anything about the Global Online Lab Delivery (GOLD) labs
> on
>>>> Partner Education Connection (PEC)? I used to use PEC fairly often
> years
>>>> back but have only recently begun poking around there again. There was
> a
>>>> very interesting online lab listed and it was only introduced just this
>>>> year. Yet every time I try to pick a date to schedule the rack I get
> the
>>>> following error:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "No valid equipments found for the exercise, please contact LabOps
>>>> administrator."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea as to how one might go about contacting the "LabOps
>>>> administrator." I seem to recall that at one time they had some really
>>> cool
>>>> racks available and I never had any trouble scheduling one. Just
> curious
>>> if
>>>> anybody else has recent experience with these?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just for whatever it's worth, here is the description of the lab I was
>>>> interested in:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "The purpose of this lab is to introduce the student to the concept of
>>> VSS,
>>>> understand the conversion process, and to allow them to gain an
>>> appreciation
>>>> of the benefits that VSS will bring to the rest of the network.
>>> Additional
>>>> labs are also available to help understand advanced VSS concepts such as
>>> VSS
>>>> ISSU, VSS troubleshooting commands & Service module integration."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Looking at the topology and the steps involved, it looks like you would
>>> gain
>>>> a fairly good grasp of actually deploying a VSS. It was estimated to be
>>> 240
>>>> minutes in duration. All very interesting if actually available.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers all,
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
-- Carlos G Mendioroz <tron@huapi.ba.ar> LW7 EQI ArgentinaBlogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 01 2009 - 12:53:08 ARST