Cisco Switching/Routing :: VPC Pair Of Nexus 7K And Servers Connected Directly
Jan 9, 2012
My Data Center has one single core switch where is connected several servers, one port is the link to the router wan and other port is the link to the FW, my boss wants to install 2 nexus in order to replace the single switch. All my network has only one address, for example 192.168.10.0/24 if I connect two nexus 7010 in VPC and Domain, each nexus is going to has 2 modules with 48 port 10/100/1000 rj45 and i wan to connect servers directly to each nexus, with this figure i'm going to have a group of servers connected in two different nexus, Do they can have the same network 192.168.10.0/24 considering that the nexus are in the same vdc and vlan and have only one gateway for both groups? If the answer is positive, which nexus would be the gate way for that address, the primary or secondary? Or i must have a different address for both group of servers, i mean for example 192.168.10.0/24 and 192.168.12.0/24?thus each nexus would be the gateway for that new address?
To have two nexus connected by VPC in a Domain mean that one computer connected to one nexus can share the same address or vlan with other computer connected to the other nexus????
We have a pair of N7K distribution switches connected to a pair of N7K Aggregation switches.We run vPC on both pairs of n7k's.
-n7k-d1 has two interfaces in a Port-Channel connecting to n7k-a1 & n7k-a2. (PC1) -n7k-d2 also has two interfaces in a Port-Channel connecting to n7k-a1 & n7k-a2. (PC2)
My problem is that Spanning-Tree is blocking PC2 and all traffic from n7k-d2 is traversing the Peer-Link before reaching the Aggregation layer. Is this the best design for connecting two pairs of n7k's with vPC or if a better design would be to connect all 4 links into the same Port-Channel and vPC?
We are running 4x n5k and started with the vPC feature. So my question is, if i can connect a vpc-pair to another vpc-pair?In the cisco docs i can find examples for connecting a vpc-pair to a single switch, or server (with and without fex)But there is nothing about how to connect 4 n5k via vPC feature.
We have HSRP between NexusA and NexusB with access layer switches connecting to the core using VPC, We are trying to setup a VAM server Voice recording for Siemens phones. We need to span all voice vlan and point it to the VAM server the VAM server connects to a 3750 Stack considering the amount of traffic multiple span session can generate I plan to move the server to the Nexus directly and run a Local Span Session.
1- As we have two Nexus running HSRP and VAM server only connects physically to one NexusA (I can run local span on that nexusA) the Second NexusB is not directly connected to the VAM server I plan to run ERSPAN so if this is the best design and which path will the span traffic take from Nexus B to NexusA will it go through the access layer switches depending on the vlans allowed on the uplinks or will it go through the 20 Gig uplink between the two Nexus allowing all vlans (VPN peer links) ? WE have approximately 10 voice vlans, Do we an example config for ERSPAN session where the source are vlans (As I am for fimilliar with RSPAN) ?
I currently have two Nexus 5548UP switches in my environment running the latest code (n5000-uk220.127.116.11.N1.1a.bin). Both of these switches are connected via a VPC Peer Link (two ports on each switch in an Ether Channel) and a VPC-Keep Alive Link (a dedicated port). Hosts connect to each switch via a VPC for both IPV4 and FCOE.
As of right now, everything works. I currently have a stack of two 3750 switches that each Nexus is connected to. This stack is doing all the Intra-VLAN Layer 3 Routing for the Nexus Switches. However, I plan to get rid of the 3750s, and move the Layer 3 Routing the Nexus 5548's, so the backplane is 10 Gig instead of 1 Gig.. I have the Layer 3 Daughter Card installed in both switches, as well as the LAN_BASE license.
So, at the moment, I am trying to find the best way to accomplish Layer 3 Routing on these two switches. Since the Nexus switches are not stacked, and the FCOE portion of HA is taking care of by the Multipathing agent on each host, I believe am just concerned with providing Intra-VLAN routing in an HA build where if one switch goes down, VLANs still route through the other switch.
Again, since the Nexus switches are not stacked, I am guessing the best way to handle this is with HSRP, but my experience with that has always been with routers that have a switch in the middle. Can I make HSRP work without having a switch between the Nexus switches? Can I track the VPC peer link, or how do I do it? I guess I am looking for a sample config.
Let's pretend I had two VLANs:
VLAN 20: 10.20.20.254 - GW and 10.20.20.0/24 VLAN 40 10.40.40.254 - GW and 10.40.40.0/24
And I wanted the Nexus switches to route these VLANs regardless of which switch was up / down..
I have a CAT 3560 connected to a ISR 2911 The 3560 has 2 subnets ( 192.168.1.0 /24 and 10.10.10.0 /24) The 2911 has interface GigabitEthernet0/1 on the 192.168.1.0 /24 and another GigabitEthernet0/0 on a WAN connection 172.16.7.246 I need to NAT both the 192.168.1.0 /24 and the 10.10.10.0 /24 to the single address 172.16.7.246 I have to use route-maps . I have IPSec VPN's and ZBF on the 2911 My problem is the NAT does not work for the 10.10.10.0 /24 network!Why?is my only option to use trunking between the 3560 and 2911 and subinterfaces on the 2911? I want to avoid sub-interfacing.
============================================================= On the Cat 3560=====================!vlan 40name the 192.168.1.0 /24 subnet!vlan 60name the 10.10.10.0 /24 subnet!interface FastEthernet0/7description Connection to Router Gig0/1switchport access vlan 40!interface FastEthernet0/16description Connection pc host on the 10.10.10.0 /24 subnetswitchport access vlan 60!interface Vlan1no ip address!interface Vlan40ip address 192.168.1.4 255.255.255.0!interface Vlan60ip address 10.10.10.10 255.255.255.0!ip classlessip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 =========================
The host on the 10.10.10.0 /24 network has the 10.10.10.10 address as it's default gateway The host can not access the WAN thru NAT....
We have a 3750X VTP Server and the rest of the switches are clients.
Due to cabling issues, we have a switch (Switch F) that we can't connect directly to the 3750X so we have it connected through another switch. Everything is set to VTP client with the correct domain and password but this not-directly-connected switch isn't receiving any VTP VLANs.
Anything I need to do on Switch D so that Switch F can receive the VTP updates?
A specific switch port which happens to be part of a 2 switch 3750 Switch Stack is seeing multiple CDP packets from 3 extra switch port interfaces that are not directly connected. Noteworthy is that the far end devices have the correct CDP entries and I physically confirmed at least two of those connections that lead to the switch "upstream to the culprit switch". Tricky part is that its production so room for maneuvering is limited. At some point I disabled all Ports save for the real uplink and the problem momentarily disappeared. Re-enable the interfaces problem resurfaces. Is there an explanation, technique to eliminate the culprit with minimal disruption?
I have a Cisco 7206VXR running 12.4(24)T3 IOS. It is configured with WCCPv2 using L2 mask redirection. I am using service groups and associated extended ACLs to select which subnets I want to redirect port 80 traffic from.
It is working fine for the subnet 192.168.1.0/24....
int gi0/2 ip wccp 10 redirect in ip address 192.168.1.99 255.255.255.0
... however, there is OSPF running between the router and a Mikrotik device directly connected to this interface. The gateway addresses for all the client subnets are on the Mikrotik. Traffic from other subnets, e.g. 192.168.2.0/24, 192.168.3.0/24 come in on this interface and I want to redirect those too. But it appears that the redirection doesn't work for those subnets (I don't see any hits on the relevant ACL for any subnet except 192.168.1.0/24).
It seems like the router only wants to redirect traffic for subnets that it has an IP address in itself. Admittedly, all of the example configs i've found on cisco.com are for redirecting traffic from directly connected subnets but I can't find anything that denies thie possibility of redirecting any traffic that comes in on a given interface.
The question is, is this how WCCPv2 redirection works? i.e., the router must have an IP address in the subnet to be redirected?
Since last week we started noticing this problem that the branch users started to complain of slow application response.. After verifying it with the ISP and middle network we noticed that if i ping from my machine (ie usernetwork) to the WAN Router interface (facing the ASA) , i get time outs.. which is strange cause this is directly connected to it via ethernet cable.
I have an Cisco 6500 CS and there is a Cisco Unified Communication Manger Server connected directly to the Core Switch.I tried to change duplex and speed ( fix and auto ) for both sides, but the same problem.
We have 2 nexus 5K installed in our data centre recently and we are connecting new three servers to nexus switches. Each server has 2 10GB ports . 1 port of serverA is connected 5K1 and other port is connected 5K2 ( sameway other 2 server connected to Neuxs 5K1 and 5K2 Switches).So do we need to create each VPC with Portchannel (like VPC 1,2 and 3 ) for each server connection?
I have two N5K (5020) switches with NX-OS - 5.0(3)N2(1). These two switches form VPC domain: peer-link = 2*10Gb ports (1/17-18) and peer-keepalive link over managements ports.Also I have two HP servers with two 10 Gb ports on each server.Each server conected by one link to each N5K switch (1/9-10). N5K downlinks configured as access ports with LACP Active mode.There is only one VLAN (1).When "no shut" command entered on N5K access ports - ports going in "not connected" status, begin flap and then going in "linkFlapErrDisabled" state.In attach - "sh run" from N5K.
I have forgot this technology name, but, I remember it can achive on between Nexus 7000s in two location, and also between two catalyst 6500.Can I ask if it can be done between one nexus and one catalyst 6500?
I am trying to create a port channel between HP servers (4 nic) and two nexus 2k. The server side its a single team with 803.2ad fault taulerence and on the nexus side it have created two port channel (port channel 1 for nexus 2k1 and port channel 2 for nexus 2k2) and made them ACTIVE (channel group mode active)
But when i add a another server on different ports and port channel them the same way as the above server on nexus 2k1 and nexus 2k2, the first server stops pinging. so i have to sht down the first port channel and reopen them - then it works, however it says NO NETWORK ACCESS on the servers (running windows 2008). the only way is to reboot the server i cant be doing this on a production network.
We have a setup of 2 Nexus 7000 chassis and several fexes (N2K-C2248TP-1GE). The fexes are connected through a port-channel to a single nexus 7000 (no vpc). (Fex 1 to Nexus 1, fex 2 to Nexus 2, fex 3 to nexus 1 etc).Are there guidelines on how to connect a server to those fexes.
I can see several possible scenario's at our site. I have drawn some scenario's on a design. I can't find detailed information on which setup is possible and which is not. The goal is to have as much redundancy as we can.When using scenario 1, do I configure an orphan port on the uplink to this server?
Can I upgrade Active/standby pair from 7.2(4) to 8.0(5)25 directly or need to upgrade to 8.0.2/4 first? Upgrade an Active/Standby Failover ConfigurationComplete these steps in order to upgrade two units in an Active/Standby failover configuration:Download the new software to both units, and specify the new image to load with the boot system command.Refer to Upgrade a Software Image and ASDM Image using CLI for more information.Reload the standby unit to boot the new image by entering the failover reload-standby command on the active unit as shown below:active#failover reload-standbyWhen the standby unit has finished reloading and is in the Standby Ready state, force the active unit to fail over to the standby unit by entering the no failover active command on the active unit.active#no failover activeNote: Use the show failover command in order to verify that the standby unit is in the Standby Ready state.Reload the former active unit (now the new standby unit) by entering the reload command:newstandby#reloadWhen the new standby unit has finished reloading and is in the Standby Ready state, return the original active unit to active status by entering the failover active command:newstandby#failover activeThis completes the process of upgrading an Active/Standby Failover pair.
Our current topology is a single N7K with two 48port 10Gb F2 linecards and FEX 2224TP in the server racks. In a few of the racks that house important servers, we have placed dual FEX 2224's. Each FEX has 2 10Gb links back to the N7k (each link on a separate LC). I've tried to create a port-channel for the important servers in such a way that each NIC on the server is connected to a separate FEX - but its failing (simple drawing attached). I've read multiple posts saying this is possible, and others that say its not. I've also submitted a TAC case and have been told it's impossible to port-channel interfaces on separate FEXs connected to a single N7k - but I find this an impossible limitation and want to verify it's actually right. Is this really a limitation?
our pair of Nexus 7000 are configured with RSTP.On the Edge-Switches we have seen an STP topology change in all connected vlans.On N7k the topology has also changed what we`ve only seen in the output of the stp details [code]
I like to configure a logging for topology changes, but i havn't found a command.
Is there an opportunity to get this logging-messages on n7k?
how the Nexus 5500s work ?currently we have two 6513 Core switches 6513-1 and 6513-2 running HSRP and RSTP. 6513-1 is currently the Root Bridge, 6513-2 is setup as our secondary root. We also have two 5548UPs setup with a peerlink between them. Picture attached. "Current Setup.jpg"
There is a 20gig port channel between the 6513s and also a 20gig port channel(peer link) between the 5548s. 5548-1 has a 10g fiber running back to 6513-1 and 5548-2 has a 10g fiber running back to 6513-2. Currently now Spanning tree is blocking the link from 6513-2 going to 5548-2 which is what we expect. We were working on moving some things to different racks the other day and moved switch 5548-2 to another rack and brought it back online without the peerlink fiber connected. We started to have issues and tried to plug the peer link back up, but still continued to have issues. We started to troubleshoot and noticed that both 5548s were acting like the master of the VPC domain and was not letting traffic pass accross the Peer Link. We then rebooted the 5548-2 with the thought that it would come back up as the secondary in the VPC domain. When it finally finished booting back up it then caused a huge loop in our network accross both uplinks to the 6513s and the 5548s peer link which in turn took our network down. Spanning tree did not work like it was suppose to and block the port going from 6513-2 to 5548-2 in time.
My thought was this didn't seem like a good setup. I went to the drawing board and decided we needed to have an uplink from both 5548-1 and 5548-2 going to 6513-1 setup as a port channel/VPC and also a uplink from 5548-1 and 5548-2 going to 6513-2 setup as a port channel/VPC. Picture Attached. "NewSetup.jpg" We are also planning on buying a "2K-C2224TP-1GE" to hang off the 5548s to use for ethernet.
how the Nexus 5ks work and haven't done a lot of research on them. Would this not be a better setup since both switches will have an active link to the root bridge? The links from the 5548s going to 6513-2 should always be in a block state until we loose both uplinks to 6513-1 or the entire switch itself correct? Also how will the 5548s reactive if I was to loose the Peer link fiber? Will they continue to work as normal? When it looses this Peer Link does it suspend all the VPCs for the servers on the secondary switch in the Domain so the network doesn't get confused on which link to send traffic up since there isn't a peer link active or is this not the case? Also with the peer link down will the 6513-1 know which 5548 to send the traffic to if there is only 1 device (not setup in a VPC) on one of the 5548s? What are your recommendations/best practice on the setup for the 2k?
I would like to make a design with 4 Nexus 5596UP. 2 of them equipped with Layer 3 Expansion Module so they can serve as core layer and the other 2 Nexus used as Layer 2 for aggregation server layer.The 2 Nexus in the core layer will run HSRP and will peer with ISP via BGP for Internet connection The 2 Nexus in the aggregation layer will be configured as layer 2 device and have FEX and switches connected to them.What I am ensure of is how the vpc and port-channel configuration should look like between the 4 nexus. What I was thinking is to run vpc between the 2 Nexus in the aggregation layer and between the 2 Nexus in the core layer. Than I was thinking of connecting each Nexus in the aggragtion layer to both Nexus in the core layer using port-channel and vice-versa.
I've got VPN connection from Cisco 877 to ASA 5520 and on the Cisco 877 I've got SIP device which doesn't has to go through VPN. I assume that for the best audio quality I should bypass the VPN and connect directly to the SIP servers, but how to configure it??
I am having some issue with SPT with the following topology.Pair of Nexus 5548 and 3750 are configured with MST instance 1.when enable STP as MST on Dell switches , it does not recognise it and create loop but if We change MST0 (only tried on one 3750 and two Dell switches in triangle in lab). its work fine.Does Dell switches only understand MST0 ?Can Nexus 5548 support MST0 if we change from MST1 and what will be effect?
I have a small network in my garage, it's basically made up of a bunch of test servers. Those and a win xp machine are all hooked up to a switch, and the win xp machine also has a wireless usb stick that is connected to my wireless router, and is being used to share internet to the rest of the machines. The test servers along with the NIC card on my win xp machine sit on a different subnet, however.When I remote into the win xp machine from my house, i can run a second remote desktop in the first session, into any of my servers. I want to do work on them, but its very laggy.
Is there a way I can setup a port either on the win xp machine or my wireless router so that i can remote directly into one of the servers? so if the win xp machine has a wireless ip address of 18.104.22.168, and one of the servers on the 2nd subnet has an internal ip of 22.214.171.124, can i have it so i can make, for instance, 126.96.36.199:6333 forward to 188.8.131.52? If not, is there any other way i can directly remote into one of the servers, by passing the first remote desktop into win xp? What settings would have to be the same across the line?
I already know that there is an option using Patton Copper Link Ethernet extender to interconnect a remote LAN with this device. Do you know if this is possible using Cisco 888-K9 or any other Cisco Device ?
I have been tasked to replace the existing Cat 6500 and 3750 switches by Nexus 7000 and Nexus 2000.I was told initially my boss plans to get 2 x Nexus 7000 and then eventually blow up to 4 x Nexus 7000s.For Nexus, is there a list of tasks / points that i need to consider for building the initial design?
Can i just link the Nexus 7000 like the following?
N7k-A ========= N7k-B | | lots of N2ks lots of N2ks
I have two separate companys both with staff at two locations and thier own networks connected with a wireless antenna which provides a high speed LAN connection between offices. I only have a single path through this antenna bridge. I have an SG200-08 switch at each end. What I am attempting to do is utlise the switches to take the two subnets at one office, combine them to one for transfer through the antenna bridge, and then resolve them into the two separate networks again at the other end.
we are planning a Nexus datacenter project with this layout:Our experiences with Nexus switches are not so large until now and the manuals are very extensive.Both N5K´s should be connected directly with all 4 N2K switches. I did not find a layout like this in the manuals. Only a design,where only 2 N2K are connected to one N5K, with this fex config:Now I´m not sure if it is right to make a config like this with the same slots and fex´s or with different slots and fex´s.
There are two Cisco 4900M L3 switches and two Cisco 2960 L2 switches. I need to configure the two L3 switches to operate as a redundant pair, as the servers connecting to them are connecting using bonded interfaces, which can only have one default gateway. So these two L3 switches need to have the same Vlan interface 1, 2 and 3 IP's set onto them.How are the two L3 switches made aware of each other? via a normal trunk? Is there some special configration for configuring a mated/redundant pair of switches? or are they both just configured as though they were the same switch, but linked?