Cisco Switching/Routing :: 3550 - Unable To Ping Internet From HSRP Standby Switch
Nov 16, 2011
I have router connected to 2 3550 switches directly. 3550A and B switches are running HSRP. OSPF is running between Router and 2 switches.
From Switch B i can ping the Router Wan interface but not the internet sites. from Switch A i can ping any sites?
Switch B
3550SMIB# sh ip routeCodes: C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area N1
1)Configured 3550 as layer 3 switch and create a default route to 192.168.2.254
2) Configured 2 static routes(for 2 vlan range traffic) and one default route to 192.168.3.254
3) ip pass through is not configured yet, still the public ip is configured at the isp router
1811 static route configs ------------------------------------ Ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.3.254 Ip route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.1 Ip route 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.1 3550 static route config -------------------------------------- Ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.254
Testing results 1)All lan communications are working fine(inter vlan also), ping to all servers from router is getting and ping to outside public ips are getting from router,but not getting ping from switch 3550 to 192.168.3.254 and any of the public ips(internet).
I have been reading several posts in this forum to try to understand ACL behaviour on a standby HSRP 6500, I would be glad to get this cleared.I have two 6509 running HSRP for all Vlans...I created VLAN 100 with standby ip address 192.168.1.129 255.255.255.128
Active 6509 (SW01) ip is 192.168.1.130/25, priority 120 Standby 6509 (SW02) ip is 192.168.1.131/25
I have created a DHCP server on the standby 6509 only on the same VLAN 100 with a defaul router of 192.168.1.129 (i.e. the hsrp vip). I connected a pc directly to the ethernet port on the standby 6509 and put it under VLAN 100 and it obtained its ip 192.168.1.200 from the ios dhcp.Now I want to restrict this PC (and any other on its subnet) to access only a remote server 172.168.10.10 and nothing else. I have created the following access list, allowing traffic to the remote server, ospf and hsrp updates,ios dhcp...
Extended IP access list SWRES 10 permit ospf any any log (172 matches) 20 permit ip any host 172.168.10.10 30 permit ip any host 224.0.0.2 40 permit udp any host 255.255.255.255 eq bootpc 50 deny ip any any log (52 matches)
I have applied this ACL on both the 6509s under interface VLAN 100 ip access-group SWRES in
1. When I ping different subnets on the 6509s from the PC, I still receive icmp replies although I expected the acl to pass traffic destined for the remote server only. I do get deny log messages on the Active 6509, but not on the standby 6509 where the PC is connected.
2. Is permitting bootpc in the acl enough for IOS DHCP server and client operation? Do i need to explicitly permit access to the defaul-router configured in the DHCP, which happens to be the VLAN 100 gateway ip and hsrp vip as well (192.168.1.129)
3. I do get deny logs on both the 6509s from the PC trying to access the local VLAN 100 broadcast address on ports 137, 138.
%SEC-6-IPACCESSLOGP: list SWRES denied udp 192.168.1.200(137) -> 192.168.1.255(137)
I am running HSRP on three 4506 switches..S1(active) S2( standby) and S3(listen)..S1 is active for all the vlansRight now, I wanted to make S3 active for two vlans: vlan 10 and 19What would be the impact to the end hosts?Also, can you tell me why the arp is not syncing for all the three devices? [code]
I have my hsp setup where switch A and switch B share active/standby roles among several vlans. In the last few weeks, i have seen trouble tickets where connectivity is lost and upon investigation i discover that i can ping physical interface IP addresses for both standby and active devices but not the standby IP. I have also validated configurations and layer 2 paths and they haven't been broken.
What I end up doing is failover to the standby device and back and the problem clears, reachability is restored. My question is whether I am solving this the right way. If so, what is it that would cause the standby IP to not be reachable and how does my solution fix that? N/B the switches are catalyst 6509's.
I am working on two Nexus 7010 with 5.1.5 NX-OS version. I configure HSRP traditionnaly, Nexus 1 with a priority of 200 and Nexus 2 with a priority of 100 for all vlan.
When I change the priority of a vlan to 200 to 50 for example, Nexus 2 become active and Nexus 1 standby. The problem is that when I do a traceroute from a PC the packet take the Nexus 1 as defaut gateway all the time.....
For information I have a peer link between the 2 Nexus for vPC.
Normally when we do HSRP with vPC on N7K the device will be Active/Standby in control plane but it will be Active/Active in data plane. In this case any traffic reach to standby device it can forward traffic directly to uplink which is not my desire. My goal is all traffic should pass through active (control plane) device in every case unless active device totally dead. So Is it possible for Nexus 7000 to be HSRP Active/Standby in Data Plane ?
If I setup 4948E's in HSRP configuration. And I connect devices to the Standby Unit that do not require redundancy. Will there be any issues passing traffic? I don't believe that standby unit blocks the traffic but wanted to confirm.
From My Router that connects to Cable modem i am unable to ping website 4.2.2.2I am able to ping all other websites fines.Same website i can ping from my pc and all other switches fine.Router has only 1 ACL thats for NAT.
I have a small cisco switch cluster (seven different 2924, 3524cisco switches) with 3550 as a cluster control which does all the inter vlan routing that works fine.
This cluster is in semi production PBX interop testing lab. This is a closed network without internet access and not connected to our corporate network.However now I have to add this capability so some equipment in the lab can get Microsoft updates over the internet.
I've created a port on a 3550 (fa0/19) and connected it to another network that has internet access. It picked an ip address and when I'm logged in to the 3550 I can ping hosts on the outside network. However I can't ping any hosts on that network from any hosts that are connected to my vlans.I've tried a few different things, but still can't make it to work.
Here is a short version of my 3550 configuration:
! version 12.2 no service pad service timestamps debug uptime service timestamps log datetime no service password-encryption
i have a device connected to 2960 switch. It is an access port and i could ping the device from other switches , also from outside the lan. But i am not able to ping the device from 2960 switch alone. I suspected and checked the arp table and it was showing as incomplete. I created the manual arp entry and tried pinging but no luck.
I have configured HSRP with InterVlan routing. All communication is flowing properly between the vlan's on Router A but when I test failover to Router B I cant ping ANYWHERE. I cannot ping any of the VLANS.
Also, From the primary router I cannot ping any of the interfaces on the secondary router.
I have 2 Cisco 1921 Routers configured for HSRP. Both the G0/1 ports plug into a Cisco 2960S 48 port POE switch (STACKED) (port 1 and port 2 which are trunked and allowing all vlans to pass through. And both of the G0/0 ports are plugged into a Cisco ASA5510.
I have attached a diagram of the setup and the interface configs of the routers.
I am at a client that I upgrade from running a single 4507 to two Nexus 5548UP switches with two Nexus 2224 fex's connected. The other access layer switches are 2960S switches. I implemented hsrp on the nexus 5k's for redudancy. The issue they are having is that some networks cannot communicate with each other. All user vlans can communicate with the server vlan, but it is not running hsrp on the vlan interface (there is a reason for that, but it not relavent for this issue). The phone vlan, which is running hsrp, can communicate with all networks.
When I am connected to either 5k, they can communicate with all devices on all networks. However, I am on vlan 10, which is a user vlan. I can communicate fine with the server vlan (vlan 101 - not running hsrp) and the phone vlan (vlan 60 - running hsrp). I cannot communicate with vlan 30 or 40, which are both running hsrp. This makes absolutely no sense at all to me. I checked out trunk ports to be sure that vlans are allowed across the networks as well. There are no firewalls between the vlans or ACL's.
I have two 1231G Aironet's that work correctly when I connect them to my Catalyst 3548XL and my 3550-48-XL switches. When I connect them to the 3550-24-PWR switch I do see them when I issue sh cdp nei det. It shows me the IP of the wireless router. But when I ping the Aironet, I do not get any replies. If I plug the Aironet into my 3548XL and ping the IP, I get 5 replies. Here is the port config on both switches:
We have an OSPF network with four 6500 Distribution Switches. They are fully meshed and see each other as peers and are sharing routes. Off of one pair (Border) there is a setup of 3750G siwtches that go off to another network and they do not run OSPF. Between the Border Dist and the 3750G Switches we run HSRP. The 3750G side uses HSRP GP 192 and the Dist Side uses HSRP 192.There are static routes on the 3750G pointing to the Dist HSRP address to get back to network.Pings fail from the OSPF side to the HSRP address on the 3750G side.If I do a trace from the OSPF side to the HSRP address it hits one border dist switch then the other and fails.If I have static routes on both border dist switches pointing to the HSRP on the 3750side, do we need to change the metric on one dist so that it is preferred over the other or should the router Id take care of that?
I have problem with IPV6 connectivity, i have two Cisco 3550 switch and they are connected over a trunk link. The ios is c3550- ipservicesk9-mz. 122- 44.SE6 , I have configured vlans on both switches and i numbered one vlan to vlan 91 ,they can ping each other when i configure ipv4 on both vlans so trunk link is functional, but when i m using IPV6 they can't ping each other!! they can only ping their own ip address not each other. [code]
I have two Cisco ASA 5510s that I would like to configure in an active passive failover setup. The ASAs are at the top of our rack and handle all our routing. We have been only using one ASA unit with one line from our ISP connected to the WAN/outside interface of the ASA. We recently had our ISP setup two lines into our rack using HSRP. I do not know what equipment they are running upstream of our ASAs but it is HSRP so it should be a set of Cisco routers/switches. Originally I thought I could just connect the 2nd new line to our 2nd ASAs WAN/outside port and setup failover using a crossover cable between the ASAs. After doing this config I had problems accessing some of our IPs in the subnet that the HSRP is part of. If I disconnected the 2nd ASAs WAN/outside line everything was fine. After talking with my ISP they explained that I need to connect both of my lines into our L2 network and then from there into the ASAs. Currently below the ASAs I have two Catalyst 3560-X switches. They are connected together with an ISL trunk and ASA-1s inside network connects to switch-1 and ASA-2 to switch-2. One idea was to connect each of the HSRP lines to each of my current switches and then from the switches to the ASA's WAN/outside interface. Finally back down from the ASA's to the switches via the inside interface that we have currently. This kind of seems messy and a poor choice. The other idea is to get two switches that would sit above the ASAs and connect the HSRP lines to them with the switches connected together. They would then connect to the ASAs. I like this idea better but I don't like having to buy two more full switches for this. These switches would only use a couple of ports and only handle just the HSRP ISP lines to the ASAs. Putting in two more 3560-Xs would be a big waste of money and space for this. So I was thinking of using two Cisco SG200-08, 8 port gigabit basic managed switches for this.
We are planning to go for HSRP redundancy for 32 VLANs. Means In a Cisco 4506-E switch , we will configure 32 vlans and among them 16 vlans will be primary and 16VLANs will be standby ans it is viceversa in another core-switch
My querie is How many standby groups can we create in Cisco 4506-E switch, Is there any limitation..
If there is any limitation , can we go ahead with VRRP,GLBP? Are there any limitation in VRRP/GLBP? Is there any design related issue can we face if we use same group number to all VLANs?
Product details :
Model : Cisco 4506-E Sup Model : WS-X45-SUP6L-E IOS : S45EIPBK9-12254SG
vlan 10 ports 1-10 vlan 21 ports 11-20 vlan 30 port 21-30 vlan 40 ports 31-40 default vlan should be vlan 21
I have the servers, switch and router connected to vlan 21. Vlan 21 works great I can browse the internet, but I cannot ping any other vlans. router is connected to fa0/19
[code] Building configuration... Current configuration : 4833 bytes ! version 12.2 no service pad
I'm having some problems setting up vlans to talk to each other on a 3550-12T switch. Its quite a simple setup I have, but I need to split my network up.
Currently I have a network of 192.168.25.0 255.255.255.0 I want to create a new vlan network of 192.168.30.0 255.255.255.0 So I have configured my vlan1 (default vlan) to have an ip of 192.168.25.250 for getting to the management page
I have created a vlan2 of 192.168.30.1 255.255.255.0 ?I have a port 10 linked to one of my 3560G's?In port 9 which is on vlan2 I have my pc plugged in with a static ip of 192.168.30.50 from the router I can ping any device on 192.168.25.x.
I can not ping 192.168.30.1 (which is my vlan2) nor can i ping the PC.
I have enabled ip routing But I dont have a default route, this is becase we don't have a router on the network.
i have an OM1 MMF fiber run between two switches, the first being a 3750 and the second being a 3550.
The link currently exceeds the maximum distance for OM1 @ 1000Mb/s (220m) so i would like to downgrade the link to 100FX using the necessary SFP's/GBIC's to extend the maximum distance to 550m and run the link @ 100Mb/s.
I have the part code for the 100FX SFP to install in the 3750 (GLC-GE-100FX) but cant find a 100FX GBIC for the 3550, can I use a 1000SX GBIC (WS-G5484) for the 3550 at one end and the 100FX SFP at the other? Any success with this configuration over MMF?
I have a 3550 switch right now, and need to upgrade to a gigabit switch, so I'm looking at a 3560G-48. For some reason I purchased an EMI version of my 3550, but run the ipbase image...what I need to look for - is a 3560G-48-s good for what I need?
We have our WAN setup as explained in the attachment herewith. As of now, We have a IP 1 configured as HSRP IP in the LAN switch end at Site A and Site B. As per the HSRP priority, Site A's WAN router will preempt to be the Active WAN router. 1*1Gig link at both DCs connect to the respectve WAN router.
But with this setup, we experience a WAN outage whenever there is a link disconect at Site A - as HSRP fails over from Active to Standby(Site B) and again when the link at Site gets restored. To avoid this :
Is it possible to have the HSRP configured over a port channel at Site A and B (or atleast at Site A) ? In that case, will there be a need for the ISP to change their configuration except to configure a port channel ? The ISP has Cisco 7000 series router which connects to 3750 stack at DC lan.
While working at a client site today, I was troubleshooting some ICMP connectivity for a network we have created.I turned on 'debug ip icmp" on the 3550 switch int he middle, and was inundated with the following debug output:
Jan 25 11:01:14.641: ICMP: dst (172.16.1.7) port unreachable rcv from 172.16.1.5 Jan 25 11:01:14.641: ICMP: dst (172.16.1.7) port unreachable rcv from 172.16.1.5 Jan 25 11:01:14.641: ICMP: dst (172.16.1.7) port unreachable rcv from 172.16.1.5 Jan 25 11:01:14.641: ICMP: dst (172.16.1.7) port unreachable rcv from 172.16.1.5
[code]....
This output fires several times a second, and based on how often it is firing, I am curious if it may be a culprit with respect to the fact that the client has indicated that they have some slow internet.Should the next step be to look at the workstation at 172.16.1.5?
I have cisco switch 3550 IOS Version 12.1(19)EA1c.
I can configure route-map commands on that. but i can not apply that into any vlan interface. while i try to apply the following command ( ip policy route-map PBR) on VLAN int i get an error msg saying that the command is not recognized.
I live in a condo building that uses 3 Cisco Catalyst 3550 switches connected to a Comcast router with 100 Mbps download. Currently we regulate bandwidth by providing each user with 3 Mbps download. Even if only two people are active they still only get 3 Mbps download. I would like to set it up so if two people are using they each get 50 Mbps; a sort of 'dynamic qos. Is this possible with these switches? Would we have to purchase a Cisco router in order to provide this feature?
I am having trouble after creating a management vlan (99) on a 3550 switch.I have configured the vlan (99) and given it an IP (192.168.1.100) and a default gateway (my router address - 192.168.1.99).I can ping to the switch from a PC and vice versa. The management VLAN IP is fine but now I cannot ping to the router from either the PC or the switch.It seems that just by adding VLAN 99 with it's own IP address has now prevented pings from the switch/ PC to the router ?Due to the fact that I have created a new switch management VLAN with an IP, does this mean I have set up the router as a 'router on a stick' scenario ? [code]
My cisco 3550 EMI switch is not responding to power connection. I have checked and changed power cable. its still not working.fan is not running and no lights on front panel
im having this strange issue where everytime i plug in a voip phone to my 3550 the switch disconnects another voip phone.then to fix the disconnected phone (7940) i need to power off the phone 5-10 minutes then power it on again.
but the strange thing is, once i have to do that to fix the phone and connect the phone back to the switch, the port link is up, but no macs are seen on that port.
