Spot on, Jason. Since each SW pair is treated as a single switch (logically) you can run a single port channel between them.
Your suggested setup is also ideal for data center interconnects and multi-layer vPC environment. Ahad On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 2:21 PM Jason Leschnik <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh and obviously the normal š > > feature lacp ; feature vpc ; feature interface-vlan > > On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 14:19, Jason Leschnik <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> With vPC on both pairs, all 4 links between the pairs can be aggregated >> into a single port-channel like the one pictured below. Practically you're >> going to setup two different vPC domains (vpc domain 1, vpc domain 2 for >> example) on the two pairs (11,12) and (13,14). With a port-channel >> configuration like the following example: >> >> Assuming e1/1-2 are the downstream links (between pairs) and e1/10-11 are >> the links between vPC peer switches >> >> *# Setup vPC* >> sw11# vpc domain 11 ; peer-keepalive destination <mgmt-ip sw12> ; int >> e1/10-11 ; channel-group 1 mode active ; int po1 ; vpc peer-link ; >> peer-switch ; peer-gateway >> sw12# vcp domain 11 ; peer-keepalive destination <mgmt-ip sw11> ; int >> e1/10-11 ; channel-group 1 mode active ; int po1 ; vpc peer-link ; >> peer-switch ; peer-gateway >> >> sw13# vpc domain 13 ; peer-keepalive destination <mgmt-ip sw14> ; int >> e1/10-11 ; channel-group 1 mode active ; int po1 ; vpc peer-link ; >> peer-switch ; peer-gateway >> sw14# vpc domain 13 ; peer-keepalive destination <mgmt-ip sw13> ; int >> e1/10-11 ; channel-group 1 mode active ; int po1 ; vpc peer-link ; >> peer-switch ; peer-gateway >> >> ! Peer-switch will allow both vPC peers to propagate the same STP BPDU >> information by sharing a vMAC >> ! Peer-gateway allows the partner to route on behalf of the other, this >> gets around some non-RFC behavior seen in certain NAS vendors products when >> using FHRP >> ! It's perfectly fine to use mgmt0 interfaces for the peer-keepalive, >> it's a stream of UDP packets to src/dst port 3200. This link can go down >> with no ill effect on vPC >> ! Note conventions for numbering of port-channels and domains is just for >> example, use whatever numbering system works for you >> >> *# Setup the port-channels* >> sw11# int e1/1-2 ; channel-group 1314 mode active ; int po1314 ; vpc >> sw12# int e1/1-2 ; channel-group 1314 mode active ; int po1314 ; vpc >> >> sw13# int e1/1-2 ; channel-group 1112 mode active ; int po1112 ; vpc >> sw14# int e1/1-2 ; channel-group 1112 mode active ; int po1112 ; vpc >> >> [image: vpc.png] >> >> Regards, >> Jason. >> >> On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 11:10, Ahad Aboss <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Radeck, >>> >>> To avoid blocked ports, you will need to configure your upstream links >>> as follows; >>> >>> Built a port-channel from SW13 to SW11/12. >>> Build a port-channel from SW14 to SW11/12. >>> >>> Physically, SW 11 and 12 looks as 2 x Switches but logically, SW 13 and >>> 14 treats SW11/12 as a single switch. >>> >>> I suggest using at least 2 x 10GE ports between SW13 & 14 as SFP's do >>> fail from time to time. >>> You can use MGM for peer link keep alive or a dedicated link. >>> >>> You can increase your port-channel capacity as your traffic grows. >>> >>> Ahad >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 10:16 AM Radek Tkaczyk <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Guys, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So from the feedback so far is that we should also link SW-13 and SW-14 >>>> directly ā updated as below. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The primary purpose for this design is to ensure redundancy across >>>> switches, and to be able to provide approx. 50 x 10Gbps ports, and 50 x 1 >>>> Gbps ports ā this also leaves heaps of room for growth as well. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Still looking for someone to go over the config with, so if you are >>>> interested (paid gig) please let me know. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Radek >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* AusNOG [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of >>>> *Radek >>>> Tkaczyk >>>> *Sent:* Sunday, 25 November 2018 4:34 PM >>>> *To:* Jacob Taylor <[email protected]> >>>> *Cc:* <[email protected]> <[email protected]> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Assistance with Cisco vPC configuration on 4 x >>>> Cisco Nexus 3000 switches >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Jake, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thatās something that I wanted to check if it was needed/recommended. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Can certainly put it in if it will help achieve better performance and >>>> redundancy >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Radek >>>> >>>> >>>> On 25 Nov 2018, at 4:26 pm, Jacob Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Radek, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Not personally familiar with vPC, more so Arista MLAG and Juniper MC-AE. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> In the diagram there isnāt a peer link between 13 & 14 - is that a >>>> mistake in the diagram or the actual design? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If you intend to build 2x20G bonds to two standalone nexus switches, >>>> thatāll work fine. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If you are trying to achieve a 40G bowtie between the two pairs Iām >>>> fairly certain that wonāt work (unless Cisco has some special black magic >>>> to transport signalling/MAC synchronisation over the bond itself). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Jake >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 25 Nov 2018, at 15:04, Radek Tkaczyk <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Guys, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I have a need to configure vPC on 4 x Cisco Nexus 3000 switches at one >>>> of our data centres ā a design that we will replicate to other data centres >>>> as well. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I think I have the config down pat, but Iād like someone with another >>>> pair of eyes to go over it with me to ensure itās 100% correct. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Is there anyone who can give me a hand here with this configuration, >>>> happy to pay for someoneās time to go over it to ensure we are doing this >>>> correctly. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The Physical setup that Iām looking for: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <image001.png> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Radek >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> AusNOG mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> AusNOG mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> AusNOG mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog >>> >>
_______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
