Re: encapsulation failed? forus FALSE? sendself FALSE? Huh?

Yeah, I did some reading on the subject and have verified pretty much
everything below. In the end, I kicked off a second instance of MST and put
824 in it and the connection (and OSPF neighbor) came right up. I moved on
thru the rest of the lab.

Thanks for your (and everyones) insight into the issue. If nothing else, I
learned from it.

-Hammer

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:52 PM, <Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com> wrote:

>
> Part of the encapsulation process is constructing the layer-2 packet
> header. Which depends on ARP and the mac address tables. In the original
> configuration was ARP getting through? Did you have the other switch's
> mac addresses in the correct VLAN? Also, is there a hub or something in
> the middle of your topo? Some of your links are at half duplex. Lastly,
> VLAN? 824 has to exist on all switches that are expected to carry the
> traffic even if they do not have access ports or an SVI in that VLAN.
> Enable vtp or manually make sure that all the VLAN? db's are constant.
>
>
> > This is getting entertaining. So, I pulled VLAN 824 from all trunks
> except
> > the ones directly between S2 and S4. The result is that VLAN 824 is not
> > being passed anywhere. However, I can now ping from S2 to S4. I Cannot
> ping
> > from S4 to S2. In the ICMP debug I am not even attempting the PING
> packet. I
> > am missing something very fundamental. This lab has been built a dozen
> times
> > in the IPExpert classes including by me when I attended. I think I'm
> going
> > to take up raising koi....
> >
>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Hammer <bhmccie_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> > Acadamy Lab 3. Good stuff.
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> > Give me a few minutes and I'll post relevant output.
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> > -Hammer
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> > On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Bryan Bartik <
> bbartik_at_ipexpert.com>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> >> What lab is this? Spanning-tree topology shouldn't matter since
> only
> > >>>> >> redundant paths are blocked. If there was a misconfiguration with
> > >>>> MST,
> > >>>> >> perhaps it could be an issue. Can you post relevant parts of the
> > >>>> configs
> > >>>> >> (SVIs, trunk ports, MST config), "sho interface trunk".
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Hammer <bhmccie_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >>> I'm using a proctorlabs rack. S1 is a 3550. Everything is using
> > >>>> SVIs.
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> 3550 - 12.2.(44)
> > >>>> >>> and
> > >>>> >>> 3560s - 12.2.(25r)SEC
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> The tasks of the lab require one instance of spanning tree (MST
> 0)
> > >>>> so all
> > >>>> >>> my
> > >>>> >>> vlans are going from S2 to S1. If I tamper with the cost of the
> > >>>> >>> interface, I
> > >>>> >>> can bring up the S2 to S4 leg but I kill the S2 to S1 leg. So I
> can
> > >>>> make
> > >>>> >>> it
> > >>>> >>> work but only by sacrificing another path.
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> -Hammer
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Ryan West <rwest_at_zyedge.com>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> > Hi,
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > Do you have a 3550 in the mix with a physical interface that
> has
> > >>>> an IP
> > >>>> >>> > address assigned to it or is everything using SVIs? If that
> is
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> >>> case,
> > >>>> >>> > just move the address to an SVI. Verify your VLAN allow list
> and
> > >>>> check
> > >>>> >>> your
> > >>>> >>> > trunk links to make sure the VLAN you're trying to reach is
> > >>>> showing up
> > >>>> >>> in
> > >>>> >>> > the list.
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > The first issue that I mentioned is detailed in this post:
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>>
> http://forum.internetworkexpert.com/ubbthreads.php/ubb/
>
> > showflat/Number/14757/page/1#Post14757
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > -ryan
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> >>> > From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com<nobody_at_groupstudy.com>]
> On
> > >>>> Behalf
> > >>>> >>> Of
> > >>>> >>> > Hammer
> > >>>> >>> > Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 1:15 PM
> > >>>> >>> > To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> > >>>> >>> > Subject: encapsulation failed? forus FALSE? sendself FALSE?
> Huh?
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > I am trying to bring up ip over a VLAN between two switches.
> It's
> > >>>> a
> > >>>> >>> typical
> > >>>> >>> > vendor lab with 4 switches and way too many connections.
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > 1X = 1 wire trunking all vlans
> > >>>> >>> > 2X = 2 wires trunking all vlans
> > >>>> >>> > EC = EtherChannel trunking all vlans
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > S1---------1x-----------S2
> > >>>> >>> > | \ / |
> > >>>> >>> > | \ / |
> > >>>> >>> > | \ / |
> > >>>> >>> > | \ / |
> > >>>> >>> > 2x EC EC 2x
> > >>>> >>> > | \ / |
> > >>>> >>> > | \ / |
> > >>>> >>> > | \ / |
> > >>>> >>> > | \ / |
> > >>>> >>> > | \ / |
> > >>>> >>> > | X |
> > >>>> >>> > | / \ |
> > >>>> >>> > | / \ |
> > >>>> >>> > | / \ |
> > >>>> >>> > | / \ |
> > >>>> >>> > | / \ |
> > >>>> >>> > | / \ |
> > >>>> >>> > | / \ |
> > >>>> >>> > | / \ |
> > >>>> >>> > | / \ |
> > >>>> >>> > S3-------1X-----------S4
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > So I need OSPF in this little party but IP first. I can ping
> > >>>> east/west
> > >>>> >>> > (from
> > >>>> >>> > 1-2 and from 3-4) and I can ping north/south (from 1-3) but I
> > >>>> cannot
> > >>>> >>> ping
> > >>>> >>> > from 2-4. The vlan they need is active. The vlan interface is
> > >>>> up/up on
> > >>>> >>> each
> > >>>> >>> > of the switches. But I can't reach the other side of the VLAN.
> So
> > >>>> first
> > >>>> >>> I
> > >>>> >>> > see that spanning tree is preferring my EC links. No problem.
> Jack
> > >>>> up
> > >>>> >>> the
> > >>>> >>> > cost to oblivion and move on. Nope. Still no love. On a debug
> ip
> > >>>> >>> packet, I
> > >>>> >>> > come up with the below:
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > BLAH BLAH BLAH, routed via FIB
> > >>>> >>> > BLAH BLAH BLAH sending
> > >>>> >>> > BLAH BLAH BLAH output feature, Check hwidb(63), rtype 1, forus
> > >>>> FALSE,
> > >>>> >>> > sendself FALSE, mtu 0
> > >>>> >>> > BLAH BLAH BLAH encapsulation failed
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > I only found two links on google and none for cco for the
> forus
> > >>>> FALSE
> > >>>> >>> > sendself FALSE. Both links were questions with no answers. Has
> > >>>> anyone
> > >>>> >>> seen
> > >>>> >>> > this before? Is this part of my encapsulation failure? Or am I
> > >>>> barking
> > >>>> >>> up
> > >>>> >>> > the wrong tree? My logic was that if I was dealing with a
> spanning
> > >>>> tree
> > >>>> >>> > issue the traffic would still exit the switch....
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > Help?
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > -Hammer
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>> >>> >
> > >>>>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > >>>> >>> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > >>>> >>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > >>>> >>> Subscription information may be found at:
> > >>>> >>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >> --
> > >>>> >> Bryan Bartik
> > >>>> >> CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP
> > >>>> >> Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
> > >>>> >> URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> <
> http://www.ipexpert.com/>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Blogs and organic groups at
> http://www.ccie.net
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > >>>> Subscription information may be found at:
> > >>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bryan Bartik
> > > CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP
> > > Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
> > > URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/>
>
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at
> http://www.ccie.net
>
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Thu Jul 09 2009 - 08:43:22 ART