Aruba & ProVision-based

HPE 6125G switch using link-aggregation connect to Extreme Summit X450a-48t

 
SOLVED
Go to solution
nnnnnnine
Occasional Contributor

HPE 6125G switch using link-aggregation connect to Extreme Summit X450a-48t

Hi Everyone,

I got a trouble to connect 6125G to Extreme X450a-48t,

my 6125G firmware version is 5.20.99, Release 2106

below is my configuration sample:

[6125G]interface GigabitEthernet 1/1/5
[6125G-GigabitEthernet1/1/5]port link-aggregation group 17
[6125G-GigabitEthernet1/1/5]dis this
#
interface GigabitEthernet1/1/5
port link-aggregation group 17
#
return
[6125G-GigabitEthernet1/1/5]interface GigabitEthernet 2/1/5
[6125G-GigabitEthernet2/1/5]port link-aggregation group 17
[6125G-GigabitEthernet2/1/5]dis this
#
interface GigabitEthernet2/1/5
port link-aggregation group 17
#
return
[6125G-GigabitEthernet2/1/5]
 
[6125G]dis link-aggregation member-port GigabitEthernet 1/1/5
Flags: A -- LACP_Activity, B -- LACP_Timeout, C -- Aggregation,
       D -- Synchronization, E -- Collecting, F -- Distributing,
       G -- Defaulted, H -- Expired
 
GigabitEthernet1/1/5:
Aggregation Interface: Bridge-Aggregation17
Local:
    Port Number: 19
    Port Priority: 32768
    Oper-Key: 1
    Flag: {ACG}
Remote:
    System ID: 0x8000, 0000-0000-0000
    Port Number: 0
    Port Priority: 32768
    Oper-Key: 0
    Flag: {EF}
Received LACP Packets: 0 packet(s)
Illegal: 0 packet(s)
Sent LACP Packets: 0 packet(s)
[6125G]
 
 
[6125G]dis link-aggregation member-port GigabitEthernet 2/1/5
Flags: A -- LACP_Activity, B -- LACP_Timeout, C -- Aggregation,
       D -- Synchronization, E -- Collecting, F -- Distributing,
       G -- Defaulted, H -- Expired
 
GigabitEthernet2/1/5:
Aggregation Interface: Bridge-Aggregation17
Local:
    Port Number: 32
    Port Priority: 32768
    Oper-Key: 1
    Flag: {ACDEFG}
Remote:
    System ID: 0x8000, 0000-0000-0000
    Port Number: 0
    Port Priority: 32768
    Oper-Key: 0
    Flag: {DEF}
Received LACP Packets: 0 packet(s)
Illegal: 0 packet(s)
Sent LACP Packets: 11 packet(s)
[6125G]
 
[6125G]interface Bridge-Aggregation 17
[6125G-Bridge-Aggregation17]dis this
#
interface Bridge-Aggregation17
link-aggregation mode dynamic
mad enable
#
return
[6125G]dis link-aggregation verbose Bridge-Aggregation 17
Loadsharing Type: Shar -- Loadsharing, NonS -- Non-Loadsharing
Port Status: S -- Selected, U -- Unselected
Flags:  A -- LACP_Activity, B -- LACP_Timeout, C -- Aggregation,
        D -- Synchronization, E -- Collecting, F -- Distributing,
        G -- Defaulted, H -- Expired
 
Aggregation Interface: Bridge-Aggregation17
Aggregation Mode: Dynamic
Loadsharing Type: Shar
System ID: 0x8000, bcea-fa02-0219
Local:
  Port             Status  Priority Oper-Key  Flag
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  GE1/1/5          S       32768    1         {ACDEFG}
  GE2/1/5          U       32768    1         {ACG}
Remote:
  Actor            Partner Priority Oper-Key  SystemID               Flag
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  GE1/1/5          0       32768    0         0x8000, 0000-0000-0000 {DEF}
  GE2/1/5          0       32768    0         0x8000, 0000-0000-0000 {DEF}
[6125G]
%Apr 26 13:49:02:862 2000 6125G LAGG/5/LAGG_INACTIVE_PARTNER: Member port GigabitEthernet1/1/5 of aggregation group BAGG17 becomes INACTIVE because the port's partner is improper for being attached.
[6125G]

and on extreme side, i had done the following configuration:

enable sharing 1:1 grouping 1:1, 2:1 algorithm address-based L3_L4 lacp

And 6125G's G1/1/5 and G2/1/5 was connect to Extreme X450a-48t 1:1 and 2:1, 

When I finish my config. I will saw the messages from console like below :

%Apr 26 12:47:31:286 2000 6125G IFNET/3/LINK_UPDOWN: GigabitEthernet1/1/5 link status is UP.
%Apr 26 12:47:31:386 2000 6125G LAGG/5/LAGG_ACTIVE: Member port GigabitEthernet1/1/5 of aggregation group BAGG17 becomes ACTIVE.
%Apr 26 12:47:31:523 2000 6125G LAGG/5/LAGG_INACTIVE_PARTNER: Member port GigabitEthernet2/1/5 of aggregation group BAGG17 becomes INACTIVE because the port's partner is improper for being attached.dis interface GigabitEthernet brief

Can any one give me an advisor.

what kind of action should i take?

 

2 REPLIES 2
parnassus
Honored Contributor
Solution

Re: HPE 6125G switch using link-aggregation connect to Extreme Summit X450a-48t

Why have you enabled the (LACP) MAD (Multi-Active Detection) on the LAG's configuration you have on your HPE 6125G?

Try to execute a (LAG-contextual) undo mad enable command to see if the LACP is finally negotiated correctly between the HPE 6125G and the Extreme Summit X450a-48t.

For sure both the Extreme and the 6125G should use not only the same LACP (That's OK) but also the same load-sharing algorithm (I see you used L3_L4 on the Extreme, see here).

On the HPE 6125G you can chose between a combination of the following criterias:

  • Load-sharing criteria automatically determined based on the packet type
  • Source IP address
  • Destination IP address
  • Source MAC address
  • Destination MAC address
  • Source IP address and destination IP address
  • Source MAC address and destination MAC address

As example: link-aggregation load-sharing mode source-mac destination-mac

So you should cope the load sharing's mode on both your switches.

Side Note: consider to keep updated your 6125G Blade's Firmware (latest Firmware released was the R2112P04, March 2016...your one was released on July 2013). See here.


I'm not an HPE Employee
Kudos and Accepted Solution banner
Ian Vaughan
Honored Contributor

Re: HPE 6125G switch using link-aggregation connect to Extreme Summit X450a-48t

Hello,

I've had something similar where the uplink cables from the Comware switch went into a 3rd party switch and were plugged into 2 ports in different LAGG groups at the other end of the link. Definitely worth checking. Other one to check (as ever) is for iffy / intermittent cable issues.

In other news:

I don't *think* that the MAD TLV's will break anything - If I remember correctly they just get silently filtered out by switches that don't understand them (rather than being reflected back as an IRF heartbeat by those that do).

The load sharing / hashing is an interesting one as sometimes (again IIRC) it can be necessary (or maybe even beneficial?) in some scenarios to have different configurations at each end of a link depending on how ancient your switches are.

If you have them available on the box, including higher layer protocols in the hash generally give a better spread - L4 good with range of negotiated TCP ports at the server end - not as good with single UDP port :-)

Please share your experiences and spread the word :-)

Ian

Hope that helps - please click "Thumbs up" for Kudos if it does
## ---------------------------------------------------------------------------##
Which is the only cheese that is made backwards?
Edam!
Tweets: @2techie4me