The best option for load balancing between 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches located at one site and connecting to 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches located at another site.
The sites are connected via a 1GB fibre connection. I am unable to use GLBP until GLBP is supported in further software releases.
I am trying to understand what load balancing method is used on a port channel on a Nexus switch . I have a server connected by a VPC to two Nexus switches. The nexus switches are only acting as layer 2 switches. I have a 6509 connected via a upstream link that does all of the routing for my VLANS. If have a server connected to the Nexus switches and it talks to a server on my 6509 what load balancing happens on the Nexus going across VPC 27 which is a layer 2 trunk going up to my 6509. Is it done on layer 2 or layer 3 flows?
My Nexus shows the default load balancing configurations
Port Channel Load-Balancing Configuration:System: source-dest-ip
Port Channel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:Non-IP: source-dest-macIP: source-dest-ip source-dest-mac
We have Nexus 7K on production. 7K chasis is not load balancing with non-cisco devices with etherchannel or LACP..I have tried all load balancing algorithms but in vain. [code]
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have 2 sites located approximately 30 kilometers apart. I will call them site 1 and site 2.The sites are connected by a Layer 2 1GB fibre connection.I would like to add 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches at site 1 and connect these 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches via GLBP
I would then like to add 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches at site 2 and connect these 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches via GLBP.I would then like to connect the 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches at site 1 and the 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches at site 2 via GLBP.
I have conneccted a server with LACP on Nexus extender. I am starting different file copy from diffferent sources to this server, it does not load balance.
source addresse: 192.168.30.3 / 192.168.30.1
destination: 192.168.30.2
I have a dual-homed fabric (Nexus 2248 dual attached to two Nexus 5020's via vPC). On this Nexus 2248 is a server that has a four port LACP etherchannel. The ports do not appear to be load balancing correctly. The output below shows the four ports in use and it clearly shows port e138/1/10 as getting the most use. When I use the "show port-channel load-balance forwarding-path..." command on either of the vPC switches for various source and destination IP's that use this link, it shows them correctly load-balancing across the four ports. But we do not see this when looking at stats on both the server side and the switch side.
dc5020-3g# sh int e138/1/10,e138/1/12,e138/1/14,e138/1/16 | i seconds
30 seconds input rate 552 bits/sec, 69 bytes/sec, 0 packets/sec
30 seconds output rate 130120 bits/sec, 16265 bytes/sec, 161 packets/sec
Load-Interval #2: 5 minute (300 seconds)
30 seconds input rate 40 bits/sec, 5 bytes/sec, 0 packets/sec
[code]....
**************** Config info below. This is a vPC pair and the port configs are identical on both switches so I'm only showing the configs for one switch to keep it simple.
dc5020-3g# sh port-channel load-balance
Port Channel Load-Balancing Configuration:
System: source-dest-ip
Port Channel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
Non-IP: source-dest-mac
IP: source-dest-ip source-dest-mac
[code]....
Is it possible to use two different load balancing methods at each end of a port-channel between two switches?
We have a Cisco 6509 at one end of the port-channel and a Cisco blade switch 3020 at the other end. Right now, we are using "src-dst-ip" at both end of the port-channel. We would like to change this. That is, we would like the #3020 switch to use "src-dst-ip" while the 6509 switch should use the "src-dst-port".
Why we want to do this, the reason is that we have FWSMs on the 6509. I've read that by configuring "src-dst-port" on the 6509, one can get a better performance of traffic going through the FWSM. However, the issue is that the 3020 switch does not support "src-dst-port".
I have followed every piece of cisco documentation I could find on this and I still can't get vPC configured to actually work. The VLANs stay in a suspended state so no traffic flows across. Below is my configuration:vrf context management ip route 0.0.0.0/0 10.86.0.1vlan 1,vlan 86 name I.S_Infrastructure,vpc domain 1 role priority 1000 peer-keepalive destination 10.86.0.4,interface Vlan1,interface Vlan86 no shutdown description I.S._Infrastructure ip address 10.86.0.1/24,interface port-channel1 switchport mode trunk vpc peer-link spanning-tree port type normal,interface Ethernet1/1 switchport mode trunk channel-group 1 mode active,interface Ethernet1/2 switchport mode trunk channel-group 1 mode active ,interface Ethernet1/3,escription Connection to Mgmt0 switchport access vlan 86 speed 1000.
View 8 Replies View Relatedis it possible to change the airflow of the Nexus 5548UP in the field by replacing fan and power supply or must the correct airflow been ordered.
View 9 Replies View RelatedI have a Nexus 5548UP that would be managed by two organizations. Is it possible to set IP addresses for mgmt0 and an SVI (or an L3 interface) without using the L3 daughter card? I don't want to route between VLANs, just to separate management traffic.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI'm trying to get a node in SVI1 on VRF1 to speak to another node in SVI2 on VRF2 to reach each other. After hours of failure, I went to outside resources. Everything I read on the internet says it's not possible on this platform and at least one TAC engineer seems to agree.
I just can't believe such a high-end data center switch is not capable of handling such a basic feature.
We currently have an environment with a 4507 as the core switch connected to four stacks of 3750e's in the wiring closets. A pair of Nexus 5548UP's also hangs off the 4507, but at the moment more or less dedicated to a certain purpose..The 5548UP's have the L3 daughter card installed.
My question is: Can a pair of Nexus 5548UP's do a C4507's job? Would we be able to decomission the 4507 and replace with the existing 5548UP's + FEXes?
I can't find anywhere whether it is possible to create a vPC domain with 2 Nexus 5548UP switches, where only 1 Nexus 5548UP has a L3 daughter card.
View 3 Replies View RelatedThis past networkers I was at the Cisco booth discussing how the 2248 can connect to the 5548 and have server connectivity. It was told to me that now, as of a fairly recent NX-OS release, you can have the 2248 going dual-homed to both 5548 via VPC and then have a server connected to both 2248 and be in active-active mode. Is this correct?
When we first deployed our 5548 and 2248 we had to put the 2248 in a straight pin mode, where it only had connections to one 5548 and then the server would dual connect to the 2248's and be in active-active mode. I was told that this changed with an NX-OS release however documentation still seems to be fragmented on what exactly is the case.
How separate is the management interface on a Nexus 5548?
In context - what's the risk of having a layer 2 only Nx5K in a DMZ and running the managment ports down into an internal managment VLAN, to form peer-keepalive links and software upgrades.
it's possible to let the Nexus 5548UP act as a DHCP server? (or if it will be possible in future releases)
View 3 Replies View RelatedI am looking to implement a QoS policy on a pair of Nexus 5548 UPs. FCoE is a factor here. I have created the following configuration and would like to get a few pairs of eyes to take a look at this for a quick sanity check.
How to make sure this config is valid. Also, I realize I'm applying an MTU of 9216 to all classes right now, this will be phased out incrementally.
class-map type qos match-all class-platinum
match cos 5
class-map type qos match-all class-gold
match cos 4
class-map type qos class-fcoe
match cos 3
[code]....
I just received a Nexus 5548 to configure as the core of the Datacenter LAN. Is it true that the VRFs created cannot talk to each other??? I can't seem to find any documentation on how to do this and at least one TAC engineer half-heartedly believes it's not possible, either.
Basically, I'm trying to get an SVI in VRF1 to be able to talk to an device on another SVI in VRF2.
I can't believe this high-end switch, that is so capable in every regard, cannot handle this feature.
I'm seeing several error messages like these in the logs of my Nexus 5548UP switches.
2012 Apr 24 16:39:41.470 SSV_5K_SW2 %LLDP-5-SERVER_ADDED: Server with Chassis ID aaaa.bbbb.cccc Port ID mgmt0 management address X.X.X.X discovered on local port mgmt0 in vlan 0 with enabled capability Bridge
2012 May 2 05:05:00.627 COR_CCO-NX-5548-UP_01 %LLDP-5-SERVER_REMOVED: Server with Chassis ID aaaa.bbbb.cccd Port ID aaaa.bbbb.cccc on local port Eth1/1 has been removed
2012 May 2 05:06:40.328 COR_CCO-NX-5548-UP_01 %LLDP-5-SERVER_ADDED: Server with Chassis ID aaaa.bbbb.cccd Port ID aaaa/bbbb.cccc management address NIL discovered on local port Eth1/1 in vlan 0 with enabled capability None
I will say that these 5548s are serving as the distribution layer for a UCS chassis (2x 6120 FIs) but didn't know what kind of visibility the Nexus would have into that - the chassis keyword is what's alluding to this in my mind, and I'm seeing these messages whenever interfaces that connect downstream to the fabric interconnects are brought up or down.
In the existing network we have Cisco 2811 router connected to Corporate MPLS cloud. Cisco 2811 is connected to Catalyst 6509 switch(set based IOS with MSFC card). Along with that we have two Catalyst 5509. We are upgrading the access layer by replacing catalyst switches with Nexus 5548 & 2248.
For a purpose of testing I have connected 5548 & 2248. Created cPC and ether channels between two. SVI and HSRP configuredon 5548. I am terminating 2651 (test router) on 2248 port 101/1/1. On 5548 I have enabled EIGRP on vlans. I am unable to ping to 2651 from nexus switch 5548 and vice-versa. I can see both devices on CDP but I do not see eigrp neighborship formed.
What configuration should go in 2248 and 2651 in order to establish a connection between two? If test is successful then I will connect 2811 to 2248 during actual migration. I assume that in testing if it works for 2651 then it must work on 2811 router.
I have a pair of Nexus 5548UPs that have some high priority servers running on them. Servers are ESX hosts running Nexus 1000v's. Each host has multple connections in a VPC to both 5548s. We have been having intermittant ping loss and slowness of traffic to the VM's on these hosts. I was poking around trying to figure out what the issue could be and found that the peer-keepalive command was not set to send the heart beat across the mgmt0 interface. I would like to change this to point it accross the mgmt0 interface. Any tips or advice for me on making this change with production servers running on the switches? I do not want to cause any loss to any systems when I make this change. [Code] ..........
View 3 Replies View RelatedWe have recently upgraded oor LAN and we are using couple of Nexus5548UP switches in the core with 2960 stacks as access switches. Each access switches stack is connnected to both core switches with link being port-chanels and VPCs. All is working fine, but our SolarWinds management platform (NPM) is being flooded with "Physical Address changed" events. Here is an example of messages:
NSW_Core_2 - Ethernet1/7 Physical Address changed from 000000003811 to 73616D653811
NSW_Core_2 - Ethernet1/7 Physical Address changed from 200B82B43811 to 000000003811
For each interface I have messages like these repeating.I am not sure what those messages means or if there is actually anything wrong. Performance of the network is good, there are no errors on any interfaces and I do not see anything related in the switch loggs.
Need clarification on the VPC with 5k and 2248 Fabric Extenders. My question is can each fabric extender uplink to two different 5ks, and at the same time, have servers connected to two both fabric extenders with a VPC.So basically, the server NIC will team with two different fabric extenders, and each fabric extender will connect to two different 5k's.
View 3 Replies View RelatedWe are currently using two Nexus 5548UP's as our Datacenter Network Core. I have a pretty simple objective: I would like to enable Jumbo Frames on a single VLAN only(VLAN 65). This VLAN is used strictly for backups. I do not want to enable Jumbo Frames on the other VLANs(VLANs 1-10). Im not sure what the best way to do this is.....or if it is even possible but I am hoping to get some configuration examples.
View 7 Replies View Relatedi'm going to configure a 881-k9 with:
- Ethernet 0/0 LAN (Private Address)
- Ethernet 0/1 ISP1 (Public Address 1)
- Ethernet 0/2 ISP2 (Public Address 2)
find some configuration example to:
- have load balancing over the two ISP connection, used to connect to Internet
- configure Static NAT to bind:
- TCP 443
- TCP 1723on ISP1 e ISP2 Interface to a LAN Address (SBS2008 Server)
I'm trying to make MGSCP solution. I have Cisco 7609 with following configuration:
Mod Ports Card Type Model
--- ----- -------------------------------------- ------------------
3 8 CEF720 8 port 10GE with DFC WS-X6708-10GE
5 5 Route Switch Processor 720 10GE (Activ RSP720-3CXL-10GE
7 24 CEF720 24 port 1000mb SFP WS-X6724-SFP
8 24 CEF720 24 port 1000mb SFP WS-X6724-SFP
9 48 CEF720 48 port 10/100/1000mb Ethernet WS-X6748-GE-TX.
We have to cisco WS-C4900M with Cisco IOS Software, Catalyst 4500 L3 Switch Software (cat4500e-IPBASE-M), Version 12.2(53)SG5, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1).We have four gigabit link connected between those two switches.We have create a LACP port channel with those four ports on both switches. Ether-channel is up and running and defined with a load-balancing method of src-dst-ip.But when we test the load-balancing, it's not using the src-dst-ip rule with the XOR: [code]
View 5 Replies View RelatedI have a 2821 Router, with a VWIC2-2MFT card in it, with two T1s going into that card. The two T1s are a bundled MPLS line.
I then have a cable modem connection going into the gigabit Ethernet GE 0/1 port on the router.
Right now, the cable modem provides a backup connection in case the T1s go down.
What I was wondering is if there was a way to 'combine' the bandwidth from the two T1s with the cable modem?
How to set up redundant LAN Ring topology with load balancing for a cisco catalyst 3560 platform.
View 10 Replies View RelatedI would like configure a CSS content, that uses the sorry service principal in an advanced way.
I am familiar with the primary Sorry Server command and see that the CSS would send all connections to the named service that is configured as the primary Sorry Server.
What I would like to do is to configure the CSS, so that once it’s decided it’s in a “sorry” state (all the services that are configured with “add service” are down) that it load balances to a different set of services.
To explain what I’ve been trying to do in the form of configuration on the CSS, I’ve pasted some pretend config below.
Connections come into IP address 1.1.1.1, which normally get load balanced between 9.1.1.1, 9.1.1.2 and 9.1.1.3.
If 9.1.1.1, 9.1.1.2 and 9.1.1.3 are all down, the sorry service is used and the CSS starts passing traffic to 1.1.2.1, which I want it to load balance between 9.1.2.1, 9.1.2.2 and 9.1.2.3.
The order that I have applied the config, is different to the below, as I set out to configure in this order: secondary services, secondary content, sorry service, primary services, primary content.
The order of the config below is different, because I wanted it in the order that the traffic flows and the CSS won’t take the config in that order!
The wall I have ran into, is that when I try to create the service I have named “Sorry Service”, I get the following error:
%% Service IP Address conflicts with a local I/F, VIP, mg mt route.
[Code] .....
Does 3650-X IP Base support Static Load Balancing or i should upgrade to ip service SW ?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI have probem with symmetric load balancig, in case when both ends of ether channel are on the sam switch (we are using VLAN translation).We need to create L2 port channel with both ends on same switch (Cisco WS-C4500X-24X-ES), for example:Po1 – Gi0/1, Gi0/3 (one end of port channel )Po2 – Gi0/2, Gi0/4 (other end of port channel)On ports in Po2 we will configure VLAN mapping.My question is what is the best ether-channel load-balancing scheme with wich we can accomplish full symmetry in both directions? For example, if traffic in one direction goes through Gi0/1 (member of Po1), in other direction also must go through Gi0/1. This is required because we need to connect four appliances for DPI (they are full L2 transparent) and traffic through each appliance need to be symmetric.
I can set-up src-ip, dst-ip, src-dst-ip etc. load balancing, but, actually I need src-ip on Po1 and dst-ip on Po2. Is there any way to set up different load balancing mechanism for different ether channel on same switch (4500X).
If the load balancing is set to src-dst-ip, will a layer 2 switch forward based on that information? Particularly talking about a 6500, with trunk interfaces, since those packets never go to the layer 3 engine, will the load-balancing work as intended?
View 2 Replies View Related